期刊文献+

注意相关认知错误量表的中文版修订 被引量:1

Revision of the Chinese Version of Attention-related Cognitive Errors Scale
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的:在大学生群体中引入注意相关认知错误量表,探讨该量表在中国文化背景下的因素结构,并检验其信效度。方法:在大学生群体中发放问卷1100份,回收有效问卷964份,另用无聊倾向量表、正念注意觉知量表和心智游移问卷作为效标,3周后随机抽取117名学生进行重测。结果:探索性因素分析表明,抽取2个因素最为合适,特征根为4.808和1.004,累积方差贡献率为52.836%。验证性因素分析显示数据拟合良好(χ2/df=1.912,CFI=0.969,TLI=0.959,RMSEA=0.053,SRMR=0.040);总量表及2个分量表内部一致性信度在0.689-0.866之间,重测信度在0.643-0.859之间;量表具有较好的效标关联效度。结论:注意相关认知错误量表中文版具有良好的信度和效度,可以用于大学生的注意相关认知错误测量。 Objective: To introduce and measure the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of Attention-related Cognitive Errors Seale(ARCES). Methods: 1100 university students were asked to complete the Chinese version of ARC- ES. At the same time, the Boredom Proneness Scale, Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, and Mind-Wandering Question- naire were used as the criterion. 117 students were followed to complete the Chinese version of ARCES three weeks after the first investigation. Results: The exploratory factor analysis showed that ARCES consisted of two factor, accounting for 52.836% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis identified a double factor model. CFI=0.969, TLI=0.959, RMSEA=O.053, SRMR=0.040. Reliability coefficients of the two dimensions and total score ranged from 0.689 to 0.866, and the test-retest reliability ranged from 0.643 to 0.859. The ARCES was of good criterion validity as well. Conclusion: The Chinese version of ARCES can be used as an effective instrument to assess the attention-related cognitive errors in Chi- nese university students.
作者 程浩 刘爱书
机构地区 哈尔滨师范大学
出处 《中国临床心理学杂志》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2016年第5期874-877,共4页 Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology
关键词 注意相关认知错误 大学生 信度 效度 Attention-related cognitive errors University students Reliability Validity
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

  • 1Beck AT, Rush J, Shaw BF. Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford Press, 1979.
  • 2Robertson IH. The absent mind attention and error. The Psy- chologist, 2003, 16(9): 476-479.
  • 3Larson GE, Alderton DL, Neideffer M, et al. Further evi- dence on dimensionality and correlates of the Cognitive Fail- ures Questionnaire. British Journal of Psychology, 1997, 88 (1): 29-38.
  • 4Giambra LM. A laboratory method for investigating influenc- es on switching attention to task-unrelated imagery and thought. Consciousness and Cognition, 1995, 4(1): 1-21.
  • 5Reason JT. Skill and error in everyday life. In M. Howe(Ed.), Adult learning. London: Wiley, 1977.
  • 6Reason JT. Actions not as planned: The price of automatiz- ation. In G. Underwood & R. Stevens(Eds.), Aspects of con- sciousness. London: Academic Press, 1979. 67-89.
  • 7Reason JT. Lapses of attention in everyday life. In R. Para- suraman & D. R. Davies(Eds.), Varieties of attention. New York: Academic Press, 1984.
  • 8Broadbent DE, Cooper PF, itzGerald P, et al. The cognitive failures questionnaire(CFQ) and its correlates. British Jour- nal of Chnical Psychology, 1982, 21(1): 1-16.
  • 9Cheyne JA, Carriere JSA, Smilek D. Absent-mindedness: Lapses of conscious awareness and everyday cognitive fail- ures. Consciousness and Cognition, 2006, 15(3): 578-592.
  • 10刘勇,陈健芷,宋琳婷,赵宇,杨晓丽,张盼,周卉.无聊倾向量表(BPS):中文版的结构、信度及效度[J].中国临床心理学杂志,2014,22(1):74-77. 被引量:19

二级参考文献59

共引文献345

同被引文献3

引证文献1

二级引证文献3

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部