分析多伦多移情问卷的因子结构:多伦多移情问卷的因素结构分析:德文版的维度、信度、效度、测量不变性和一年稳定性。

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Journal of personality assessment Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-03 DOI:10.1080/00223891.2023.2224873
Tobias Janelt, Tobias Altmann, R Nathan Spreng, Marcus Roth
{"title":"分析多伦多移情问卷的因子结构:多伦多移情问卷的因素结构分析:德文版的维度、信度、效度、测量不变性和一年稳定性。","authors":"Tobias Janelt, Tobias Altmann, R Nathan Spreng, Marcus Roth","doi":"10.1080/00223891.2023.2224873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the face of heterogeneity in the measurement of empathy, the <i>Toronto Empathy Questionnaire</i> (TEQ; Spreng et al., Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(1), 62-71 (2009)) was developed as a brief unidimensional tool by statistically forming a consensus from existing measures of the construct. The present study aimed to (1) validate a German version of the TEQ, and (2) contribute empirical evidence to the ongoing debate regarding a singular versus multidimensional factor structure of the TEQ. One cross-sectional and two longitudinal studies were performed, with a total of 1,075 participants. Our initial exploratory factor analyses suggested either a one- or a two-factor structure (with the two-factors clustering straight and reverse-scored items); the two-factor model outperformed the one-factor model using confirmatory factor analyses. However, after negated items were replaced by positively reworded alternatives, both models fit the data equally well. A comparison of the correlation patterns with numerous external measures indicated that a second factor of the TEQ is a methodological artifact of item wording. Finally, a unidimensional TEQ scale showed sufficient internal consistency, two-week test-retest reliability, one-year stability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity with measures of empathy, emotion recognition, emotion regulation, altruism, social desirability, and the Big Five personality traits.</p>","PeriodicalId":16707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality assessment","volume":" ","pages":"230-241"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analyzing the Factor Structure of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: Dimensionality, Reliability, Validity, Measurement Invariance and One-Year Stability of the German Version.\",\"authors\":\"Tobias Janelt, Tobias Altmann, R Nathan Spreng, Marcus Roth\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00223891.2023.2224873\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the face of heterogeneity in the measurement of empathy, the <i>Toronto Empathy Questionnaire</i> (TEQ; Spreng et al., Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(1), 62-71 (2009)) was developed as a brief unidimensional tool by statistically forming a consensus from existing measures of the construct. The present study aimed to (1) validate a German version of the TEQ, and (2) contribute empirical evidence to the ongoing debate regarding a singular versus multidimensional factor structure of the TEQ. One cross-sectional and two longitudinal studies were performed, with a total of 1,075 participants. Our initial exploratory factor analyses suggested either a one- or a two-factor structure (with the two-factors clustering straight and reverse-scored items); the two-factor model outperformed the one-factor model using confirmatory factor analyses. However, after negated items were replaced by positively reworded alternatives, both models fit the data equally well. A comparison of the correlation patterns with numerous external measures indicated that a second factor of the TEQ is a methodological artifact of item wording. Finally, a unidimensional TEQ scale showed sufficient internal consistency, two-week test-retest reliability, one-year stability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity with measures of empathy, emotion recognition, emotion regulation, altruism, social desirability, and the Big Five personality traits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"230-241\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2023.2224873\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2023.2224873","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

面对同理心测量的异质性,多伦多同理心问卷(TEQ;Spreng 等人,《人格评估期刊》,91(1),62-71(2009))通过对现有的同理心测量方法进行统计并达成共识,开发出了一种简短的单维工具。本研究旨在:(1) 验证德文版 TEQ;(2) 为目前关于 TEQ 单因素结构还是多维因素结构的争论提供经验证据。我们进行了一项横向研究和两项纵向研究,共有 1,075 人参加。我们最初的探索性因素分析表明,该问卷具有单因素或双因素结构(双因素将直向得分和反向得分项目聚集在一起);通过确证性因素分析,双因素模型优于单因素模型。然而,在用正向改词替代否定项目后,两个模型对数据的拟合程度相当。与许多外部测量指标的相关模式比较表明,TEQ 的第二因子是项目措辞在方法上的伪命题。最后,单维 TEQ 量表显示出了足够的内部一致性、两周测试再测可靠性、一年稳定性,以及与同理心、情绪识别、情绪调节、利他主义、社会可取性和大五人格特质测量的收敛有效性和区分有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analyzing the Factor Structure of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: Dimensionality, Reliability, Validity, Measurement Invariance and One-Year Stability of the German Version.

In the face of heterogeneity in the measurement of empathy, the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ; Spreng et al., Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(1), 62-71 (2009)) was developed as a brief unidimensional tool by statistically forming a consensus from existing measures of the construct. The present study aimed to (1) validate a German version of the TEQ, and (2) contribute empirical evidence to the ongoing debate regarding a singular versus multidimensional factor structure of the TEQ. One cross-sectional and two longitudinal studies were performed, with a total of 1,075 participants. Our initial exploratory factor analyses suggested either a one- or a two-factor structure (with the two-factors clustering straight and reverse-scored items); the two-factor model outperformed the one-factor model using confirmatory factor analyses. However, after negated items were replaced by positively reworded alternatives, both models fit the data equally well. A comparison of the correlation patterns with numerous external measures indicated that a second factor of the TEQ is a methodological artifact of item wording. Finally, a unidimensional TEQ scale showed sufficient internal consistency, two-week test-retest reliability, one-year stability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity with measures of empathy, emotion recognition, emotion regulation, altruism, social desirability, and the Big Five personality traits.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
8.80%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA) primarily publishes articles dealing with the development, evaluation, refinement, and application of personality assessment methods. Desirable articles address empirical, theoretical, instructional, or professional aspects of using psychological tests, interview data, or the applied clinical assessment process. They also advance the measurement, description, or understanding of personality, psychopathology, and human behavior. JPA is broadly concerned with developing and using personality assessment methods in clinical, counseling, forensic, and health psychology settings; with the assessment process in applied clinical practice; with the assessment of people of all ages and cultures; and with both normal and abnormal personality functioning.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信