中文版防御性悲观问卷(社会版)在大学生中的信效度检验

Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the Revised Defensive Pessimism Questionnaire(Social)

目的:修订、引进防御性悲观问卷(社会版),并检验其信效度。方法:使用Defensive Pessimistic Question-naire,DPQ(social)的中文译本,对420名大学生进行测试,随机选取一半大学生进行探索性因素分析,另一半进行验证性因素分析。以特质焦虑(TA),大五人格问卷,自尊,中国人整体思维量表为效标,检验效标效度。结果:修订的DPQ(social)共14个条目,有3个因素的特征值>1,可以解释53.72%的总体方差,验证性因素分析表明量表的结构效度良好。DPQ(social)总分与TA、神经质、变化性和矛盾性思维方式成正相关,与宜人性成负相关。DPQ(social)的内部一致性系数分别为:反思性0.72,焦虑0.81,悲观期望0.76,总分0.75。40名学生间隔1月的总分重测信度为0.70。结论:中文版防御性悲观问卷(社会版)具有较好的信效度,可以在国内大学生群体研究中采用。

Objective： To revise and introduce the Revised Defensive Pessimism Questionnaire[DPQ（Social）], and examine its reliability and validity in China. Methods： Totally 420 college students completed a battery of structured question- naires, including the Chinese Version of DPQ（Social）, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory（TA）, Short-edition of NEO-FFI, Self- Esteem Scale, and Chinese Thinking Style Scale. Results： The Chinese Version of DPQ （Social） consisted of 14 items and 3 subseales. Exploratory factor analysis supported a three factor structure, and their cumulative contribution rate was 53.72%. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the hypothesized three factor model. DPQ（Social） score was positively cor- related with TA, NEO-FFI N, and two subscales of Chinese Thinking Style （variability and contradictory）, while negatively correlated with NEO-FFI A. The internal consistency for the overall scale was 0.75 and for the subscales （reflectivity, anxiety and negative expectation） were 0.72, 0.81 and 0.76. The test-retest reliability of the overall scale was 0.70 after 1 month. Conclusion： The Chinese version of DPQ（Social） is reliable and valid for Chinese college students.