Validity and reliability of the generalized pliance and tracking 2-way scale: GPT-2s

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Kazuya Inoue , Isa Okajima
{"title":"Validity and reliability of the generalized pliance and tracking 2-way scale: GPT-2s","authors":"Kazuya Inoue ,&nbsp;Isa Okajima","doi":"10.1016/j.jcbs.2025.100931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study developed and examined the validity and reliability of a scale that simultaneously measures generalized pliance and tracking with more focus on actions in daily situations. The so-called Generalized Pliance and Tracking 2-way Scale: GPT-2s comprises 16 items (8 items each for generalized pliance and tracking). In Study 1, an online survey was conducted among 1500 Japanese individuals (420 men, 1054 women, 26 others [mean age = 29.47 years, <em>SD</em> = 10.89]). We confirmed no violation of unidimensionality in the generalized pliance and generalized tracking factors by item response theory. Internal consistency was measured with Cronbach’s α =.80 for the generalized pliance factor and .84 for the tracking factor. Test–retest reliability was also assessed with intraclass correlation (1,1) = .61, 95 % CI [.55, .67] for generalized pliance and intraclass correlation (1,1) = .56, 95 % CI [.49, .62] for tracking. Regarding convergent validity, the generalized pliance score had a moderately negative correlation with the autonomy factor on the psychological well-being scale (<em>r</em> = −.42). Conversely, the generalized tracking score had moderately positive correlations with the clarification of value and commitment (<em>r</em> = .43) and the overall psychological well-being scale score (<em>r</em> = .48). Furthermore, generalized tracking scores were higher in the healthy group. In Study 2, generalized pliance score showed positive correlation with the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (<em>r</em> = .43) and generalized tracking score showed positive correlation with the Generalized Tracking Questionnaire (<em>r</em> = .54). Finally, we discussed the usefulness and limitations of the GPT-2s.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","volume":"38 ","pages":"Article 100931"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144725000638","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study developed and examined the validity and reliability of a scale that simultaneously measures generalized pliance and tracking with more focus on actions in daily situations. The so-called Generalized Pliance and Tracking 2-way Scale: GPT-2s comprises 16 items (8 items each for generalized pliance and tracking). In Study 1, an online survey was conducted among 1500 Japanese individuals (420 men, 1054 women, 26 others [mean age = 29.47 years, SD = 10.89]). We confirmed no violation of unidimensionality in the generalized pliance and generalized tracking factors by item response theory. Internal consistency was measured with Cronbach’s α =.80 for the generalized pliance factor and .84 for the tracking factor. Test–retest reliability was also assessed with intraclass correlation (1,1) = .61, 95 % CI [.55, .67] for generalized pliance and intraclass correlation (1,1) = .56, 95 % CI [.49, .62] for tracking. Regarding convergent validity, the generalized pliance score had a moderately negative correlation with the autonomy factor on the psychological well-being scale (r = −.42). Conversely, the generalized tracking score had moderately positive correlations with the clarification of value and commitment (r = .43) and the overall psychological well-being scale score (r = .48). Furthermore, generalized tracking scores were higher in the healthy group. In Study 2, generalized pliance score showed positive correlation with the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (r = .43) and generalized tracking score showed positive correlation with the Generalized Tracking Questionnaire (r = .54). Finally, we discussed the usefulness and limitations of the GPT-2s.
广义依从性与追踪性双向量表的效度与信度:GPT-2s
本研究开发并检验了一种量表的有效性和可靠性,该量表同时测量广义服从和跟踪,更多地关注日常情况下的行动。所谓广义顺应与跟踪双向量表:GPT-2s包括16个项目(广义顺应与跟踪各8个项目)。在研究1中,对1500名日本人(男性420人,女性1054人,其他26人[平均年龄= 29.47岁,SD = 10.89])进行在线调查。我们用项目反应理论证实了广义依从性和广义跟踪因素不违反单维性。内部一致性采用Cronbach 's α = 0.80的广义顺应因子和。84表示跟踪因子。再测信度也被评估为类内相关(1,1)= .61,95% CI[。]55岁。[67]广义顺应性和类内相关性(1,1)= 0.56,95% CI[。49岁。[62]跟踪。在收敛效度方面,广义依从性得分与心理健康量表的自主性因子呈中度负相关(r = - 0.42)。相反,广义跟踪得分与价值和承诺的澄清(r = 0.43)和整体心理健康量表得分(r = 0.48)呈中等正相关。此外,健康组的广义跟踪得分更高。研究2中,广义顺从得分与广义顺从问卷呈正相关(r = 0.43),广义追踪得分与广义追踪问卷呈正相关(r = 0.54)。最后,我们讨论了gpt -2的有用性和局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
18.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science is the official journal of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS). Contextual Behavioral Science is a systematic and pragmatic approach to the understanding of behavior, the solution of human problems, and the promotion of human growth and development. Contextual Behavioral Science uses functional principles and theories to analyze and modify action embedded in its historical and situational context. The goal is to predict and influence behavior, with precision, scope, and depth, across all behavioral domains and all levels of analysis, so as to help create a behavioral science that is more adequate to the challenge of the human condition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信