Face, Construct and Criterion Validity, and Test-Retest Reliability, of the Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire

IF 3.2 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED

European Journal of Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI:10.1027/1015-5759/a000782

Mandira Mishra, Mark S. Allen

{"title":"Face, Construct and Criterion Validity, and Test-Retest Reliability, of the Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire","authors":"Mandira Mishra, Mark S. Allen","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This research sought to test the face, construct and criterion validity, and test-retest reliability of the Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire (ARSQ). In Study 1, participants ( n = 45) completed the ARSQ and questions assessing scale item relevancy, clarity, difficulty, and sensitivity. In Study 2, participants ( n = 513) completed the ARSQ and demographic questions. In Study 3, participants ( n = 244) completed the ARSQ and returned 2 weeks later to complete the ARSQ and measures of depression, anxiety, and self-silencing behavior. Study 1 provided strong support for face validity with all items deemed relevant, clear, easy to answer, and neither distressing nor judgmental. Study 2 provided adequate support for the factor structure of the ARSQ (single-factor model and two-factor model) but suggested modifications could be made to improve scale validity. Study 3 provided further support for an adequate (but not good) factor structure, and evidence for criterion validity established through medium-large effect size correlations with depression, anxiety, and self-silencing behavior. However, the 2-week scale stability appeared poor ( r = .45) in a subsample of participants. Overall, the ARSQ showed sufficient validity to recommend its continued use, but we recommend further tests of scale reliability and potential modifications to increase construct validity.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000782","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: This research sought to test the face, construct and criterion validity, and test-retest reliability of the Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire (ARSQ). In Study 1, participants ( n = 45) completed the ARSQ and questions assessing scale item relevancy, clarity, difficulty, and sensitivity. In Study 2, participants ( n = 513) completed the ARSQ and demographic questions. In Study 3, participants ( n = 244) completed the ARSQ and returned 2 weeks later to complete the ARSQ and measures of depression, anxiety, and self-silencing behavior. Study 1 provided strong support for face validity with all items deemed relevant, clear, easy to answer, and neither distressing nor judgmental. Study 2 provided adequate support for the factor structure of the ARSQ (single-factor model and two-factor model) but suggested modifications could be made to improve scale validity. Study 3 provided further support for an adequate (but not good) factor structure, and evidence for criterion validity established through medium-large effect size correlations with depression, anxiety, and self-silencing behavior. However, the 2-week scale stability appeared poor ( r = .45) in a subsample of participants. Overall, the ARSQ showed sufficient validity to recommend its continued use, but we recommend further tests of scale reliability and potential modifications to increase construct validity.

查看原文本刊更多论文

成人排斥敏感性问卷的面、构、标有效性及测试复测信度

摘要：本研究旨在检验成人排斥敏感性问卷（ARSQ）的表观、结构和标准的有效性，以及重测的信度。在研究1中，参与者（n=45）完成了ARSQ和评估量表项目相关性、清晰度、难度和敏感性的问题。在研究2中，参与者（n=513）完成了ARSQ和人口统计学问题。在研究3中，参与者（n=244）完成了ARSQ，并在2周后返回，以完成ARSQ和抑郁、焦虑和自我沉默行为的测量。研究1为面部有效性提供了有力的支持，所有项目都被认为是相关的、清晰的、易于回答的，既不令人痛苦，也不具有评判性。研究2为ARSQ的因子结构（单因子模型和双因子模型）提供了足够的支持，但建议可以进行修改以提高量表的有效性。研究3为充分（但不好）的因素结构提供了进一步的支持，并通过与抑郁、焦虑和自我沉默行为的中大型效应大小相关性建立了标准有效性的证据。然而，在参与者的子样本中，两周量表的稳定性似乎很差（r=.45）。总体而言，ARSQ显示出足够的有效性，可以建议继续使用，但我们建议进一步测试量表的可靠性和潜在的修改，以提高结构的有效性。

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

European Journal of Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED-

CiteScore

6.40

自引率

4.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.