期刊文献+

愤怒反刍思维量表中文版大学生人群信效度检验 被引量:15

The Reliability and Validity of Chinese Version Anger Rumination Scale in College Students
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的:探讨"愤怒反刍思维量表(Anger Rumination Scale,ARS)"在中国大学生中的适用性及信度和效度检验。方法:采用方便抽样的方法,抽取434名大学生完成ARS量表的初测,抽取508名大学生完成ARS量表的正式施测,ARS量表正式施测时,同时完成作为效标的反刍思维量表(Ruminative Responses Scale,RRS)、特质愤怒量表(Trait Anger Scale,TAS)、攻击量表(Aggression Questionnaire,AQ)的测试,其中107名大学生四周后重测ARS量表。结果:ARS量表中文版的内部一致性信度为0.868,重测信度为0.679,条目-总分相关分析和因素分析结果表明中文版ARS量表与英文版保持了一致的量表结构,并有良好的效标关联效度,与各效标之间的相关系数分别为0.501,0.546,0.611。结论:ARS量表具有良好的信度与效度,可用于大学生愤怒反刍思维水平的评估。 Objective: To compile the Chinese version of Anger Rumination Scale and to examine its reliability and validity. Methods: On the principle of convenience sampling, 434 college students completed the forecasting version of ARS,and 508 college students completed formal test of ARS. 508 college students also completed Ruminative Responses Scale,Trait Anger Scale, Aggression Questionnaire as criterion, 107 of them were retested with ARS after 4 weeks. Results: Internal consistency reliability of ARS was 0.868, and test-retest reliability was 0.679. Results indicated that the Chinese version of ARS maintained a consistent scale construct validity with the English version by using item-total correlation analysis and factor analysis, and ARS maintained good criterion-related validity. Correlation coefficients to criterions were0.501,0.546,0.611. Conclusion: Chinese version of ARS has good reliability and validity, and can be used for anger rumination assessment in Chinese college students.
出处 《中国临床心理学杂志》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2017年第4期667-670,共4页 Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology
基金 重庆市教育科学"十二五"规划2015资助项目(2015-GX-004) 西南政法大学2015资助项目(2015XZZD-07)
关键词 大学生 愤怒反刍 信度 效度 College students Anger rumination Reliability Validity
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献69

  • 1王征宇.症状自评量表(SCL-90).上海精神医学,1984,2(2):68-70.
  • 2Nolen-Hoeksema S, Morrow J. A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms after a natural disaster:The Loma Prieta earthquake. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1991,61(1) : 115-121.
  • 3Roberts JE, Gilboa E, Gotlib IH. Ruminative response styles and vulnerability to episodes of dysphoria : Gender, neur-oticism, and episode duration. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1998,22(4) : g01-423.
  • 4Bagby RM, Parker JA. Relation of rumination and distraction with neuroticism and extraversion in a sample of patients with major depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2001,25(1) :91-102.
  • 5Treynor W,Gonzalez R,Nolen-Hoeksema S. Rumination reconsidered :A psychometric analysis. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2003,27(3) : 247-259.
  • 6Nolen-Hoeksema S,Davis CG. "Thanks for sharing that":Ruminators and their social support networks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999,77(4) : 801-814.
  • 7Just N,Alloy LB. The response styles theory of depression: Tests and an extension of the theory. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1997,106(2) : 221-229.
  • 8Butler LD,Nolen-Hoeksema S. Gender differences in response to depressed mood in a college sample. Sex Roles, 1994,30(5) : 331-346.
  • 9陈昌惠.症状自评量(Symptom Checklist90 SCL-90).汪向东,王希林,马弘,等编著.心理卫生评定量表手册.,..
  • 10季益富,于欣.自尊量表(The self-esteem scale SES).汪向东,王希林,马弘,等编著.心理卫生评定量表手册.,..

共引文献316

同被引文献129

引证文献15

二级引证文献15

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