住院病人Rotter不完整句空白对象关系量表的心理测量特征。

IF 2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
John Rucker, Benjamin Berry, Katrina Rufino
{"title":"住院病人Rotter不完整句空白对象关系量表的心理测量特征。","authors":"John Rucker, Benjamin Berry, Katrina Rufino","doi":"10.1080/00223891.2025.2539406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Object relations (OR) scales were recently developed for the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank by Rucker and Krishnamurthy (2023). This study examined the psychometric properties of these scales with <i>N</i> = 160 psychiatric inpatients by evaluating the factor structure, internal reliability, and criterion validity with instruments measuring object relations features. A confirmatory factor analysis indicated a two-factor model was a better fit than a one-factor model; however, neither were excellent fits. Interrater reliability was excellent for the Self-Representation (<i>r</i> = .95), Other-Representation (<i>r</i> = .96), and Total OR scales (<i>r</i> = .97). Internal consistency reliability for the Total OR scale was acceptable at α = .72, but Self-Representation (α = .67) and Other-Representation (α = .58) subscales were in the clinically suboptimal range. Construct validity analyses demonstrated several conceptually relevant convergences with scales from the Inventory for Personality Organization and Bell Object Relations and Reality Testing Inventory, but unconvincing divergences. Group differences in RISB OR scores were observed between inpatients with and without a personality disorder. Altogether, these findings provide mixed psychometric support for the RISB OR scales and raise doubts about their use as standalone instruments. Results suggest a need for continued reevaluation, if not refinement.</p>","PeriodicalId":16707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric Properties of Object Relations Scales for the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank in an Inpatient Sample.\",\"authors\":\"John Rucker, Benjamin Berry, Katrina Rufino\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00223891.2025.2539406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Object relations (OR) scales were recently developed for the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank by Rucker and Krishnamurthy (2023). This study examined the psychometric properties of these scales with <i>N</i> = 160 psychiatric inpatients by evaluating the factor structure, internal reliability, and criterion validity with instruments measuring object relations features. A confirmatory factor analysis indicated a two-factor model was a better fit than a one-factor model; however, neither were excellent fits. Interrater reliability was excellent for the Self-Representation (<i>r</i> = .95), Other-Representation (<i>r</i> = .96), and Total OR scales (<i>r</i> = .97). Internal consistency reliability for the Total OR scale was acceptable at α = .72, but Self-Representation (α = .67) and Other-Representation (α = .58) subscales were in the clinically suboptimal range. Construct validity analyses demonstrated several conceptually relevant convergences with scales from the Inventory for Personality Organization and Bell Object Relations and Reality Testing Inventory, but unconvincing divergences. Group differences in RISB OR scores were observed between inpatients with and without a personality disorder. Altogether, these findings provide mixed psychometric support for the RISB OR scales and raise doubts about their use as standalone instruments. Results suggest a need for continued reevaluation, if not refinement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-31\",\"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/10.1080/00223891.2025.2539406\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2025.2539406","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对象关系(OR)量表是最近由Rucker和Krishnamurthy(2023)为Rotter不完整句子空白开发的。本研究以160例精神科住院患者为研究对象,采用测量对象关系特征的工具,对量表的因子结构、内部信度和效度进行评估。验证性因子分析表明,双因素模型比单因素模型更适合;然而,两人都不是非常合适的人选。自我表征量表(r = 0.95)、他人表征量表(r = 0.96)和总OR量表(r = 0.97)的量表间信度极佳。总OR量表的内部一致性信度为α = 0.72,可接受,但自我表征(α = 0.67)和其他表征(α = 0.58)亚量表在临床次优范围内。建构效度分析与人格组织量表、贝尔对象关系量表和现实测试量表的几个概念相关的趋同,但不令人信服的分歧。在有和没有人格障碍的住院患者之间观察RISB OR评分的组间差异。总之,这些发现为RISB OR量表提供了混合的心理测量支持,并对其作为独立工具的使用提出了质疑。结果表明需要继续重新评估,如果不是改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Psychometric Properties of Object Relations Scales for the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank in an Inpatient Sample.

Object relations (OR) scales were recently developed for the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank by Rucker and Krishnamurthy (2023). This study examined the psychometric properties of these scales with N = 160 psychiatric inpatients by evaluating the factor structure, internal reliability, and criterion validity with instruments measuring object relations features. A confirmatory factor analysis indicated a two-factor model was a better fit than a one-factor model; however, neither were excellent fits. Interrater reliability was excellent for the Self-Representation (r = .95), Other-Representation (r = .96), and Total OR scales (r = .97). Internal consistency reliability for the Total OR scale was acceptable at α = .72, but Self-Representation (α = .67) and Other-Representation (α = .58) subscales were in the clinically suboptimal range. Construct validity analyses demonstrated several conceptually relevant convergences with scales from the Inventory for Personality Organization and Bell Object Relations and Reality Testing Inventory, but unconvincing divergences. Group differences in RISB OR scores were observed between inpatients with and without a personality disorder. Altogether, these findings provide mixed psychometric support for the RISB OR scales and raise doubts about their use as standalone instruments. Results suggest a need for continued reevaluation, if not refinement.

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:604180095
Book学术官方微信