重新评估反刍:反刍日重建法(DRM-R)评估日常生活中反刍次数的有效性。

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-28 DOI:10.1037/pas0001282
Eve A Rosenfeld, Cassondra Lyman, Curtis M Wojcik, Kathryn S Macia, John E Roberts
{"title":"重新评估反刍:反刍日重建法(DRM-R)评估日常生活中反刍次数的有效性。","authors":"Eve A Rosenfeld, Cassondra Lyman, Curtis M Wojcik, Kathryn S Macia, John E Roberts","doi":"10.1037/pas0001282","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rumination is a robust vulnerability to depression and potential treatment target. However, we know relatively little about rumination in daily life. This study tested the validity of a new approach for assessing daily episodes of rumination, the Day Reconstruction Method for Rumination (DRM-R). Participants (<i>N</i> = 127) who were either high or low in neuroticism completed baseline self-report measures (e.g., depression, trait rumination). Next, they completed the DRM-R by reconstructing the previous day into a series of \"scenes,\" identifying discrete episodes of rumination, and responding to follow-up items about each episode. 78.6% of high neuroticism participants reported experiencing discrete periods of rumination, 80.0% reported constant ruminative thoughts in the back of their heads, and 68.6% reported ruminative thoughts of fluctuating intensity. Time spent ruminating was moderately correlated with trait measures of rumination and worry. Findings provide preliminary evidence that the DRM-R is a valid method for assessing discrete episodes of rumination in daily life. The DRM-R may reveal, ideographically, the relationship between specific thought content and features of ruminative episodes (e.g., length, frequency). Further research is needed to establish whether the DRM-R can detect changes in rumination across multiple days and how it corresponds with traditional daily diary methods and ecological momentary assessment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1098-1107"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reassessing rumination: Validity of the Day Reconstruction Method for Rumination (DRM-R) to assess episodes of rumination in daily life.\",\"authors\":\"Eve A Rosenfeld, Cassondra Lyman, Curtis M Wojcik, Kathryn S Macia, John E Roberts\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pas0001282\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Rumination is a robust vulnerability to depression and potential treatment target. However, we know relatively little about rumination in daily life. This study tested the validity of a new approach for assessing daily episodes of rumination, the Day Reconstruction Method for Rumination (DRM-R). Participants (<i>N</i> = 127) who were either high or low in neuroticism completed baseline self-report measures (e.g., depression, trait rumination). Next, they completed the DRM-R by reconstructing the previous day into a series of \\\"scenes,\\\" identifying discrete episodes of rumination, and responding to follow-up items about each episode. 78.6% of high neuroticism participants reported experiencing discrete periods of rumination, 80.0% reported constant ruminative thoughts in the back of their heads, and 68.6% reported ruminative thoughts of fluctuating intensity. Time spent ruminating was moderately correlated with trait measures of rumination and worry. Findings provide preliminary evidence that the DRM-R is a valid method for assessing discrete episodes of rumination in daily life. The DRM-R may reveal, ideographically, the relationship between specific thought content and features of ruminative episodes (e.g., length, frequency). Further research is needed to establish whether the DRM-R can detect changes in rumination across multiple days and how it corresponds with traditional daily diary methods and ecological momentary assessment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1098-1107\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001282\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001282","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

反刍是抑郁症的一个严重弱点,也是潜在的治疗目标。然而,我们对日常生活中的沉思知之甚少。本研究测试了一种评估每日反刍次数的新方法——反刍日重建法(DRM-R)的有效性。神经质高或低的参与者(N=127)完成了基线自我报告测量(如抑郁、特质沉思)。接下来,他们通过将前一天重建为一系列“场景”,识别离散的沉思片段,并对每个片段的后续项目做出回应,完成了DRM-R。78.6%的高神经质参与者报告经历了离散的沉思期,80.0%的参与者报告后脑勺有持续的沉思想法,68.6%的参与者报告强度波动的沉思想法。反刍所花费的时间与反刍和担忧的特质测量适度相关。研究结果提供了初步证据,证明DRM-R是评估日常生活中离散反刍事件的有效方法。DRM-R可以从意识形态上揭示特定思维内容与沉思事件特征(如长度、频率)之间的关系。需要进一步的研究来确定DRM-R是否能够检测到多天内反刍的变化,以及它如何与传统的日常日记方法和生态瞬时评估相一致。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reassessing rumination: Validity of the Day Reconstruction Method for Rumination (DRM-R) to assess episodes of rumination in daily life.

Rumination is a robust vulnerability to depression and potential treatment target. However, we know relatively little about rumination in daily life. This study tested the validity of a new approach for assessing daily episodes of rumination, the Day Reconstruction Method for Rumination (DRM-R). Participants (N = 127) who were either high or low in neuroticism completed baseline self-report measures (e.g., depression, trait rumination). Next, they completed the DRM-R by reconstructing the previous day into a series of "scenes," identifying discrete episodes of rumination, and responding to follow-up items about each episode. 78.6% of high neuroticism participants reported experiencing discrete periods of rumination, 80.0% reported constant ruminative thoughts in the back of their heads, and 68.6% reported ruminative thoughts of fluctuating intensity. Time spent ruminating was moderately correlated with trait measures of rumination and worry. Findings provide preliminary evidence that the DRM-R is a valid method for assessing discrete episodes of rumination in daily life. The DRM-R may reveal, ideographically, the relationship between specific thought content and features of ruminative episodes (e.g., length, frequency). Further research is needed to establish whether the DRM-R can detect changes in rumination across multiple days and how it corresponds with traditional daily diary methods and ecological momentary assessment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
×
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