Derks Suzanne D M, de Bildt Annelies, Andries Veerle M M, Knapen Saskia, Sterkenburg Paula S
Department of Clinical Child and Family Studies & Amsterdam Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2025 Jul;38(4):e70111. doi: 10.1111/jar.70111.
To assess epistemic trust in people with intellectual disabilities, we adapted the Questionnaire Epistemic Trust (QET) for people with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning (MMID/BIF).
We investigated the factor structure, the reliability and construct validity in 147 adults.
We replicated the 4-factor structure, after excluding four items with low factor loadings. Internal consistency was α = 0.58 for Hypervigilance, and ranged from α = 0.74 to 0.81 for the other subscales. Subscale test-retest reliability ranged from 0.504 to 0.747. No convergent validity was found with the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ). Discriminant validity was confirmed with the Scale of Emotional Development-Questionnaire (SED-Q), Scale of Emotional Development-Short (SED-S) and Autism Spectrum Quotient-10 (AQ-10), but not with General Social Trust (GST).
The QET is promising for assessing epistemic trust of people with MMID/BIF at subscale level. Refining the items with a figurative expression seems needed.
为了评估对智力残疾者的认知信任,我们对轻度至中度智力残疾或边缘智力功能(MMID/BIF)者改编了认知信任问卷(QET)。
我们调查了147名成年人的因子结构、信度和结构效度。
在排除四个因子载荷较低的项目后,我们复制了四因子结构。“过度警惕”的内部一致性α = 0.58,其他分量表的α值范围为0.74至0.81。分量表重测信度范围为0.504至0.747。与反思功能问卷(RFQ)未发现收敛效度。通过情绪发展问卷量表(SED-Q)、情绪发展简表(SED-S)和自闭症谱系商数-10(AQ-10)证实了区分效度,但与一般社会信任(GST)未证实。
QET在分量表水平评估MMID/BIF者的认知信任方面很有前景。似乎需要用形象化表达来完善这些项目。