《中国大学生心理健康量表》的编制

本研究在文献研究、咨询案例分析、专家访谈和讨论、开放式问卷调查的基础上,采用实证法,编制了大学生心理健康量表,制定了全国大学生常模,并对其信度和效度进行了检验。结果表明:该量表具有良好的信度与效度,可以用于我国大学生心理健康水平的的检测。     

《中国大学生人格量表》的编制*

在建立中国人人格大七结构模型以及成熟的人格量表基础上,本研究通过实证研究建立了适用于大学生群体的人格量表。统计结果表明,由68个项目、7个维度构成的中国大学生人格量表(CCSPS)与中国人人格的7因素模型有着良好的拟合,而且信度和效度检验均符合心理测量学要求;此外,在55098名被试上建立了CC-SPS的常模。研究结果表明CCSPS针对中国大学生群体可靠的人格测量工具。     

对文件筐测验(I-B)在选拔高层经理人员中的实证研究

以中国联通辽宁省分公司地市级副总经理选拔中收集到的数据,通过尝试采用文件筐测验的新型计分技术,分析研究了文件筐测验的信度和敛度。结果表明,新型计分技术可以有效改进传统计分技术的一些缺点,体现了文件筐测验未来的计分发展方向;新型计分技术基础上的评分一致性信度较高;在与由笔试、结构化面试和无领导小组讨论综合确定的选拔结果的比较中,文件筐测验获得了较高的同时效度。同时．研究也对文件筐测验结构效度方面存在的问题进行了分析,并对文件筐测验的进一步研究提出了建议。     

Person perception in the heat of conflict: Negative trait attributions affect procedural preferences and account for situational and cultural differences

Disputes by their nature involve contentious behavior. If one attributes such behavior to underlying personality traits, these attributions can be quite damning. The current research investigated negative trait attributions and their impact on dispute resolution decisions. We hypothesized that judging one's opponent to be low in agreeableness and high in emotionality (e.g. stubborn and volatile) shifts one's preference towards more formal procedures – formal in the sense that a third party judge controls the process and outcome. Drawing on the attribution literature, we hypothesized that two antecedents of these judgments (and consequent preferences) are the perceiver's level of prior information and the perceiver's cultural proclivity to explaining behavior in terms of personal dispositions. Results of an experiment measuring reactions to a hypothetical dispute found that prior information and culture (USA vs Hong Kong) increased trait attributions and preferences for formal procedures. Additionally, expectancy measures showed interaction effects suggesting that disputants dynamically construct expectancies in light of their personality impressions.     

Psychometric properties of the mobility inventory for agoraphobia: convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity

Aims of this study were (a) to summarize the psychometric literature on the Mobility Inventory for Agoraphobia (MIA), (b) to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the MIA's Avoidance Alone and Avoidance Accompanied rating scales relative to clinical severity ratings of anxiety disorders from the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule (ADIS), and (c) to establish a cutoff score indicative of interviewers’ diagnosis of agoraphobia for the Avoidance Alone scale. A meta-analytic synthesis of 10 published studies yielded positive evidence for internal consistency and convergent and discriminant validity of the scales. Participants in the present study were 129 people with a diagnosis of panic disorder. Internal consistency was excellent for this sample, α = .95 for AAC and .96 for AAL. When the MIA scales were correlated with interviewer ratings, evidence for convergent and discriminant validity for AAL was strong (convergent r with agoraphobia severity ratings = .63 vs. discriminant rs of .10–.29 for other anxiety disorders) and more modest but still positive for AAC (.54 vs. .01–.37). Receiver operating curve analysis indicated that the optimal operating point for AAL as an indicator of ADIS agoraphobia diagnosis was 1.61, which yielded sensitivity of .87 and specificity of .73.     

Is Originality in the Eye of the Beholder? Comparison of Scoring Techniques in the Assessment of Divergent Thinking

Divergent thinking (DT) tests are among the most popular techniques for measuring creativity. However, the validity evidence for DT tests, as applied in educational settings, is inconsistent partly due to different scoring methods. This study explored the reliability and validity issues of various techniques for administering and scoring two DT tests. Results show distinct differences among several methods for scoring these DT tests and suggest that the percentage scoring method (i.e., dividing originality scores by fluency scores) may be the most appropriate scoring strategy. The potential impact on educational research and practice is discussed in detail.     

追踪研究中测验信度的估计

追踪研究中测验工具的信度是衡量追踪研究质量的重要指标。传统的信度估计方法不适用于估计追踪研究的测验信度。近年来, 研究者提出了四种估计追踪研究的测验信度, 包括估计单个时间点的测验信度系数rw和r(Sw), 以及估计整个追踪研究的测验信度系数RT和RL。本文评述了这四种信度估计方法的数学模型、前提假设及其优缺点。RT和RL既可估计追踪研究中单个时间点的测验信度, 也可估计追踪研究中整个追踪研究的测验信度, 所需要的前提假设较少, 推荐同时使用RT和RL来估计追踪研究的测验信度。     

两水平研究中单维测验信度的估计

在心理、教育和管理等研究领域中,经常会碰到两水平（两层）的数据结构,如学生嵌套在班级中,员工嵌套在企业中。在两水平研究中,被试通常不是独立的,如果直接用单水平信度公式进行估计,会高估测验信度。文献上已有研究讨论如何更准确地估计两水平研究中单维测验的信度。本研究指出了现有的估计公式的不足之处,用两水平验证性因子分析推导出一个新的信度公式,举例演示如何计算,并给出简单的计算程序。     

单维测验合成信度元分析

元分析是根据现有研究对感兴趣的主题得出比较准确和有代表性结论的一种重要方法,在心理、教育、管理、医学等社会科学研究中得到广泛应用。信度是衡量测验质量的重要指标,用合成信度能比较准确的估计测验信度。未见有文献提供合成信度元分析方法。本研究在比较对参数进行元分析的三种模型优劣的基础上,在变化系数模型下推出合成信度元分析点估计及区间估计的方法;以区间覆盖率为衡量指标,模拟研究表明本研究提出的合成信度元分析区间估计的方法得当;举例说明如何对单维测验的合成信度进行元分析。     

项目表述效应对人格测验信度和效标效度的影响——以核心自我评价量表(CSES)为例

项目表述效应是指由项目表述方式的差异引起的与测量内容无关的系统变异,项目表述效应模型的统计本质是一种双因子模型。本研究以核心自我评价量表(CSES)为例,探讨项目表述效应对人格测验信效度的影响。采用核心自我评价量表、生活满意度量表和积极情感消极情感量表对340名“蚁族”进行测查。结果表明,CSES在核心自我评价特质以外,还存在一个反向题项目表述效应因子;忽视项目表述效应对CSES的同质性信度和效标关联效度有重要影响：高估CSES的同质性信度,低估核心自我评价与生活满意度、积极情感的正相关,高估核心自我评价与消极情感的负相关。