Rutherford M J, McDermott P A, Cacciola J S, Alterman A I, Mulvaney F
Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104, USA.
J Pers Disord. 1998 Summer;12(2):119-25. doi: 10.1521/pedi.1998.12.2.119.
The self-report Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) was designed to assess defenses along a developmental continuum. Factor analysis of the original DSQ suggested that the scale assessed four factors or types of defenses, whereas a more recent factor analysis indicated the DSQ measured three-factors: Immature, Neurotic, and Mature. No data, however, regarding the reliability or unique construct validity of DSQ dimensions was published. This article reports on factor analyses of two DSQ versions in a sample of 215 methadone maintenance patients. Results indicate that both DSQ versions are unidimensional, assessing only Immature defenses. The lack of published psychometric data raises concerns regarding the true reliability of DSQ dimensions reported in previous investigations. Prior statements based on DSQ findings may have been incorrect if the DSQ factors were unreliable. Findings from this investigation stress the importance of requiring and evaluating the psychometric integrity of an instrument before employing it in research.
自我报告防御方式问卷(DSQ)旨在沿着发展连续体评估防御方式。对原始DSQ的因素分析表明,该量表评估了四种防御因素或类型,而最近的因素分析表明DSQ测量了三个因素:不成熟、神经质和成熟。然而,没有关于DSQ维度的信度或独特结构效度的数据发表。本文报告了对215名美沙酮维持治疗患者样本中两个DSQ版本的因素分析。结果表明,两个DSQ版本都是单维的,仅评估不成熟防御。缺乏已发表的心理测量数据引发了对先前调查中报告的DSQ维度的真正信度的担忧。如果DSQ因素不可靠,基于DSQ结果的先前陈述可能是不正确的。这项调查的结果强调了在研究中使用一种工具之前要求并评估其心理测量完整性的重要性。