{"title":"PID-5-SRF 在线管理:不同数据收集格式之间的心理测量指标和测量不变性。","authors":"Ana Maria Barchi-Ferreira, Flavia Osório","doi":"10.47626/2237-6089-2023-0711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The PID-5 is a tool used to assess maladaptive personality traits according to the DSM-5 Alternative Model. Objective: The objective is to seek evidence of the validity and reliability of the Personality Inventory for DMS-5 (PID-5-SRF) admin-istered online and assess its measurement invariance compared to the paper-and-pencil administration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of 274 individuals from the general population (73.4% of women; 34.76 years old ±11.6) completed the instrument online after the study was dissemi-nated on social media and among the authors' contacts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Internal consistency (facets α≥0.70; domains α≥0.89) and test-retest reliability (15 to 30 days: facets ICC≥0.63; domains ICC≥0.82) were satisfactory, but a floor effect was found in almost all the items. A large number of facets (N=9) showed better fit to a bifactorial structure, and the Exploratory Factor Analysis suggested that a six-factor model better fits the data. Measurement invariance between the online and paper-and-pencil administrations was not attested at a configural level.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results revealed satisfactory psychometric indicators when the instrument was applied online, confirming its feasibility in collecting data. However, the in-strument's structure is not invariant, and caution must be adopted when compar-ing and interpreting data collected through different formats.</p>","PeriodicalId":46305,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PID-5-SRF online administration: psychometric indicators and measurement invariance between different formats of data collection.\",\"authors\":\"Ana Maria Barchi-Ferreira, Flavia Osório\",\"doi\":\"10.47626/2237-6089-2023-0711\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The PID-5 is a tool used to assess maladaptive personality traits according to the DSM-5 Alternative Model. Objective: The objective is to seek evidence of the validity and reliability of the Personality Inventory for DMS-5 (PID-5-SRF) admin-istered online and assess its measurement invariance compared to the paper-and-pencil administration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of 274 individuals from the general population (73.4% of women; 34.76 years old ±11.6) completed the instrument online after the study was dissemi-nated on social media and among the authors' contacts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Internal consistency (facets α≥0.70; domains α≥0.89) and test-retest reliability (15 to 30 days: facets ICC≥0.63; domains ICC≥0.82) were satisfactory, but a floor effect was found in almost all the items. A large number of facets (N=9) showed better fit to a bifactorial structure, and the Exploratory Factor Analysis suggested that a six-factor model better fits the data. Measurement invariance between the online and paper-and-pencil administrations was not attested at a configural level.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results revealed satisfactory psychometric indicators when the instrument was applied online, confirming its feasibility in collecting data. However, the in-strument's structure is not invariant, and caution must be adopted when compar-ing and interpreting data collected through different formats.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46305,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47626/2237-6089-2023-0711\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47626/2237-6089-2023-0711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
PID-5-SRF online administration: psychometric indicators and measurement invariance between different formats of data collection.
Introduction: The PID-5 is a tool used to assess maladaptive personality traits according to the DSM-5 Alternative Model. Objective: The objective is to seek evidence of the validity and reliability of the Personality Inventory for DMS-5 (PID-5-SRF) admin-istered online and assess its measurement invariance compared to the paper-and-pencil administration.
Methods: A sample of 274 individuals from the general population (73.4% of women; 34.76 years old ±11.6) completed the instrument online after the study was dissemi-nated on social media and among the authors' contacts.
Results: Internal consistency (facets α≥0.70; domains α≥0.89) and test-retest reliability (15 to 30 days: facets ICC≥0.63; domains ICC≥0.82) were satisfactory, but a floor effect was found in almost all the items. A large number of facets (N=9) showed better fit to a bifactorial structure, and the Exploratory Factor Analysis suggested that a six-factor model better fits the data. Measurement invariance between the online and paper-and-pencil administrations was not attested at a configural level.
Conclusion: The results revealed satisfactory psychometric indicators when the instrument was applied online, confirming its feasibility in collecting data. However, the in-strument's structure is not invariant, and caution must be adopted when compar-ing and interpreting data collected through different formats.