Assessing the process of desensitization therapy: Five practical measures

Assessment of phobic behavior has included self-report, physiological, and in vivobehavioral measures. While self-report measures are convenient, they suffer from subject bias and a low predictive validity. Physiological and in vivobehavioral measures are often too cumbersome to implement in standard clinical practice. The current study investigated the validity of five convenient measures of phobic behavior during the process of desensitization therapy. Responses of 14 clinically phobic patients were compared on phobic and neutral scenes presented within the context of systematic desensitization therapy. Phobic scenes resulted in less clarity of scene visualization, a longer latency to clear scene visualization, higher subjective units of discomfort (SUDs) at clear visualization, a longer latency to relaxation, and higher SUDs at relaxation. The measures seemed to reflect accurately the process and stages of desensitization therapy and showed low to high intercorrelations. The pragmatic value of these measures is discussed, as well as suggestions for future validational research.     

Reliability and validity of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List - Revised

A recent factor analysis of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List (MAACL) changed the Anxiety, Depression, and Hostility scales from bipolar to unipolar scales and added two new scales: Positive Affect and Sensation Seeking. Internal reliability of the MAACL-R scales, computed for normal and patient samples, was adequate for state and trait forms except for Sensation Seeking. Test-retest reliability in college students was higher for the trait form with retest intervals of from 2 to 8 weeks than for the state form with retest intervals of from 2 to 5 days. The pattern of correlations among self-, peer, and counselor ratings and the MAACL-R scales for normal and patient samples indicates improved discriminant validity and equally good convergent validity as the old scales. The use of standard scores that are indexed to the number of items checked reduced scale intercorrelations by controlling the acquiescence set.The financial support of the Weldon Springs Endowment Fund, University of Missouri at Kansas City, toward the completion of this research project is gratefully acknowledged.     

霍式中国职业兴趣量表构想效度的验证性因素分析（Ⅱ）：多特质多方法矩阵的LISREL模型比较检验

霍式中国职业兴趣量表通过验证性因素分析的交叉证实检验,显示出具备良好的会聚效度和区分效度,但同时也显示出一定的来自方法偏误的影响。在本研究中,研究者采用多特质多方法的Ｌｉｓｒｅｌ模型各成分间的比较检验法,对模型中特质因素、方法因素及方法偏误因素等各成分的作用做了进一步的区分,以考察二者各自影响作用的大小。结果表明,霍式中国职业兴趣量表构想效度良好,来自方法偏误的影响作用不大。     

COPE量表的初步修订

以我国７４４名文、理、工科大学生为被试,对ＣｈａｒｌｅｓＳ．Ｃａｒｖｅｒ等编制的ＣＯＰＥ量表进行了初步修订。结果表明：ＣＯＰＥ量表在我国大学生中应用具有良好的信度和效度,基本符合心理测量学标准,可以作为评估应付活动的工具。     

Researchers discover what they already knew about validity: The case of the family-of-Origin Scale

This article is concerned with two recnet studies of the Family-of-Origin Scale (FOS), Gavin and Wamboldt (1992) and Ryan, Kawash, Fine, and Powel (1994). The external validity analyses conducted for the FOS in these studies assumed the scale to be a unidemsional measure. The present discussion centers on methodological decisions and interpretive strategies that may have prevented a more complete understanding of the scale's dimensional structure and theoretical meaning. It is concluded that a unidimensional view of the FOS is an oversimplification that is inconsistent with the available data. A case is made for a more comprehensive and technically adequate evaluation of the FOS. Specific suggestions are offered.     

自我描述问卷上海常模的修订报告

自我描述问卷是一种在国际上被广泛运用的自我概念测量量表,为了使我国的教育和医务工作者也能使用这种测量工具.我们对其进行了引进和修订.并初步制定出上海常模,从试用的结果来看.对我国6-12年级的初高中学生非常适用。分数的分布里常态.对测验结果作各种心理测量学的分析,信度指标：a.全量表的内在稳定性各年级在.92-.96之间,各分量表的内在稳定性在.66-.9文之间。b.各分量表的重测信度为.56-.75.效度指标：a.各分量表之间的相关较低,b.同质性很好,C.三个学业自我概念分量表与学习成绩间有很高的正相关,鉴于以上这些结果,该量表在中国中学生中使用有较高的信度,效度和实用价值。     

A psychometric examination of the multidimensional perfectionism scale

The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS), developed by Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate (1990), was constructed using an all female sample at an elite university. This study examined the psychometric properties of the instrument using a more typical sample (n=278) of college students from a large state university and a small liberal arts college, both located in the South. Significant differences were found on the overall MPS score as well as six of the seven subscales between this sample and that of Frostet al. No gender differences were found for any of the MPS scores. Internal reliability was found to be .88 for the total score, with subtests ranging from .57 to .95. Interscore correlations were relatively consistent with the Frostet al. sample except for a negative correlation between the PS subscale and the total score. There was a strong confirmation of the underlying factor structure reported by Frostet al. The overall impression was that the MPS is a psychometrically sound instrument of potential value in studying the construct of perfectionism.     

Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the Morrow Assessment of Nausea and Emesis (MANE) for the assessment of cancer chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting

The present study evaluated the concurrent validity of two assessment approaches for the measurement of cancer chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting. The results indicated that the concurrent validity between the Morrow Assessment of Nausea and Emesis (MANE; Morrow, 1984b) and continuous self-monitoring and the reliability on the MANE were moderate. The heterotrait-monomethod and heterotrait-heteromethod matrices demonstrated moderate correlations among the frequency, severity, and duration of anticipatory nausea and vomiting as well as high correlations among the frequency, severity, and duration of posttreatment nausea and vomiting. Additionally, the heterotrait-monomethod matrices show a number of correlations above chance between anticipatory and posttreatment symptoms. The results are discussed in light of future research endeavors.This research was supported in part by Research Grant IN-150 from the American Cancer Society.     

The topics in medieval logic

The topics is a theory of argumentation based upon topoi or in Latin loci. The medieval logicians used works by Aristotle and Boethius as their sources for this doctrine, but they developed it in a rather original way. The topics became a higher-level analysis of arguments which are non-valid from a purely formal point of view, but where it is none the less legitimate to infer the conclusion from the premiss(es). In this connection the topics give rise to a number of discussions about the form and the matter of arguments. Further the topic contribute to the elaboration of the important doctrine of the second intentions, i.e. higher-level concepts of the particular things. In some respects the topics may be said to form a link between formal and informal logic. The topics vanished as a part of logic at the end of the Middle Ages, perhaps because the medieval logicians never got rid of Boethius' claim to have compiled a complete list of the loci, which was an unlucky one. The topics does not have an exact parallel in modern formal logic, but some reflections on non-formal argumentation by recent authors contain certain resemblances to it.