评估整个青春期早期的冷酷无情-情感特征:对简易版本的进一步评估。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Giuseppe Corbelli, Valentina Levantini, Pietro Muratori, Vincenzo Paolo Senese, Carmela Bravaccio, Simone Pisano, Gennaro Catone, Marinella Paciello
{"title":"评估整个青春期早期的冷酷无情-情感特征:对简易版本的进一步评估。","authors":"Giuseppe Corbelli, Valentina Levantini, Pietro Muratori, Vincenzo Paolo Senese, Carmela Bravaccio, Simone Pisano, Gennaro Catone, Marinella Paciello","doi":"10.1007/s10578-024-01746-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Literature on the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional (ICU) traits has suggested different versions of the instrument for assessing these traits during development. However, consensus on the instrument version and the best factorial solution remains a matter of debate, with only a few studies having validated ICU versions from a longitudinal perspective. The current study aims to contribute to the literature by comparing ICU models in a longitudinal sample of early adolescents (N = 739; 70.6% of eligible subjects, 371 females and 368 males, in the 6th grade at baseline assessment and in the 8th grade at the second assessment). We tested the validity of various versions of the ICU scales and their respective dimensions by conducting a series of confirmatory factor analyses to verify the factor structure, alongside assessments of internal consistency. For the best-fitting structure, we then analyzed gender and longitudinal invariance in addition to construct and predictive validity, using internalizing and externalizing criteria as well as prosocial behavior. From the comparative analysis, it emerged that the abbreviated 11-item ICU scale version displayed overall better data fit than the full 24-item version. Moreover, its confirmed gender invariance underscores its applicability across genders within the studied age group. With regard to longitudinal invariance, our findings advise caution when comparing ICU scores across early adolescence. Practical implications are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":10024,"journal":{"name":"Child Psychiatry & Human Development","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Callous-Unemotional Traits Across Early Adolescence: Further Evaluation of Short Versions.\",\"authors\":\"Giuseppe Corbelli, Valentina Levantini, Pietro Muratori, Vincenzo Paolo Senese, Carmela Bravaccio, Simone Pisano, Gennaro Catone, Marinella Paciello\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10578-024-01746-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Literature on the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional (ICU) traits has suggested different versions of the instrument for assessing these traits during development. However, consensus on the instrument version and the best factorial solution remains a matter of debate, with only a few studies having validated ICU versions from a longitudinal perspective. The current study aims to contribute to the literature by comparing ICU models in a longitudinal sample of early adolescents (N = 739; 70.6% of eligible subjects, 371 females and 368 males, in the 6th grade at baseline assessment and in the 8th grade at the second assessment). We tested the validity of various versions of the ICU scales and their respective dimensions by conducting a series of confirmatory factor analyses to verify the factor structure, alongside assessments of internal consistency. For the best-fitting structure, we then analyzed gender and longitudinal invariance in addition to construct and predictive validity, using internalizing and externalizing criteria as well as prosocial behavior. From the comparative analysis, it emerged that the abbreviated 11-item ICU scale version displayed overall better data fit than the full 24-item version. Moreover, its confirmed gender invariance underscores its applicability across genders within the studied age group. With regard to longitudinal invariance, our findings advise caution when comparing ICU scores across early adolescence. Practical implications are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Child Psychiatry & Human Development\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Child Psychiatry & Human Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-024-01746-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child Psychiatry & Human Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-024-01746-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有关 "爱哭-不爱说话特质量表"(ICU)的文献提出了不同版本的量表,用于评估儿童成长过程中的这些特质。然而,关于工具版本和最佳因子解决方案的共识仍存在争议,只有少数研究从纵向角度验证了 ICU 版本。本研究旨在通过比较青少年早期纵向样本中的 ICU 模型(样本数=739;70.6%的合格受试者,371 名女性和 368 名男性,基线评估时为六年级,第二次评估时为八年级),为相关文献做出贡献。我们对不同版本的 ICU 量表及其各自维度进行了有效性测试,通过一系列确认性因子分析来验证因子结构,同时评估内部一致性。对于最合适的结构,我们使用内化和外化标准以及亲社会行为,分析了性别和纵向不变性以及构建和预测有效性。比较分析结果表明,11 个项目的 ICU 量表缩略版总体上比 24 个项目的完整版显示出更好的数据拟合度。此外,该量表的性别不变性得到了证实,这突出表明它适用于所研究年龄组中的不同性别。关于纵向不变性,我们的研究结果表明,在比较青春期早期的 ICU 分数时应谨慎。本文还讨论了其实际意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing Callous-Unemotional Traits Across Early Adolescence: Further Evaluation of Short Versions.

Literature on the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional (ICU) traits has suggested different versions of the instrument for assessing these traits during development. However, consensus on the instrument version and the best factorial solution remains a matter of debate, with only a few studies having validated ICU versions from a longitudinal perspective. The current study aims to contribute to the literature by comparing ICU models in a longitudinal sample of early adolescents (N = 739; 70.6% of eligible subjects, 371 females and 368 males, in the 6th grade at baseline assessment and in the 8th grade at the second assessment). We tested the validity of various versions of the ICU scales and their respective dimensions by conducting a series of confirmatory factor analyses to verify the factor structure, alongside assessments of internal consistency. For the best-fitting structure, we then analyzed gender and longitudinal invariance in addition to construct and predictive validity, using internalizing and externalizing criteria as well as prosocial behavior. From the comparative analysis, it emerged that the abbreviated 11-item ICU scale version displayed overall better data fit than the full 24-item version. Moreover, its confirmed gender invariance underscores its applicability across genders within the studied age group. With regard to longitudinal invariance, our findings advise caution when comparing ICU scores across early adolescence. Practical implications are discussed.

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
0.50
自引率
3.40%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: Child Psychiatry & Human Development is an interdisciplinary international journal serving the groups represented by child and adolescent psychiatry, clinical child/pediatric/family psychology, pediatrics, social science, and human development. The journal publishes research on diagnosis, assessment, treatment, epidemiology, development, advocacy, training, cultural factors, ethics, policy, and professional issues as related to clinical disorders in children, adolescents, and families. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original empirical research in addition to substantive and theoretical reviews.
×
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