无望抑郁症状问卷(HDSQ)的中文版修订

目的：翻译和修订无望抑郁症状问卷，并测试中文版的信效度。方法：用翻译的无望抑郁症状问卷和Beck抑郁量表对大学生进行两次测试。结果：①修订的无望抑郁症状问卷中文版的探索性主成分分析显示，无望抑郁症状问卷由8个因子组成，累计贡献率为62．733％，因素负荷为0．548～0．937；②验证性因素分析显示，本问卷的8个因子可以合并成一个高阶因子，二阶因子模型是拟合度最优的模型；③各分量表与问卷总分的相关系数在0．524-0．810之间（P〈0.01），各分量表之间的相关系数在0．328～0．660之间（P〈0．01）；④本问卷内部一致性系数为0．8724，分半系数为0．7223，重测信度为0．8322。结论：修订的中文版无望抑郁症状问卷的信度和效度指标符合心理测量学的要求。可作为大学生的无望抑郁测量工具。     

抑郁与自尊水平、自我效能感的关系研究

目的：探讨不同抑郁状态个体的自尊水平和自我效能感。方法：本研究以BDI、SDS、CCMD-3和汉密顿抑郁量表为工具筛选出了80名正常对照组、175名抑郁情绪组、17名抑郁康复组和24名抑郁患者组成员，所有被试完成自尊量表和自我效能感问卷测量。结果：自尊水平、自我效能感与抑郁得分显著负相关，与BDI相关系数分别为0．513，0．309；四组被试的自尊水平、自我效能感有显著差异（F=60．172，P=0．000；F=26．758，P=0．000），抑郁患者组和抑郁情绪组显著低于正常对照组和抑郁康复组；不同自尊水平和自我效能感时抑郁得分（BDI）有显著差异（F=118．403，P=-0．000：F=33．844．P=-0．000）．低自尊水平和自我效能感时抑郁得分高。结论：自尊水平、自我效能感与抑郁得分显著负相关．自尊水平、自我效能感降低是抑郁的状态特征而非特质特征。     

依赖、自我批评人格特质与抑郁症状的关系

目的:了解依赖、自我批评与抑郁患者的抑郁程度和不同抑郁症状之间的关系。方法:对290例抑郁障碍病人进行流调中心用抑郁量表(CES-D)和抑郁体验问卷(DEQ)的测量。结果:①高依赖高自我批评者的CES-D总分及抑郁的躯体症状、抑郁情绪因子分显著高于低依赖低自我批评抑郁障碍患者(P<0.05);②依赖、自我批评与CES-D总分、抑郁的躯体症状、抑郁情绪症状的相关均具有统计学意义(r在0.203～0.297之间);③自我批评因子对CES-D总分、抑郁情绪症状有显著的回归效应;自我批评因子对男性抑郁患者的躯体症状有显著的回归效应,依赖因子对女性抑郁患者的躯体症状有显著的回归效应。结论:依赖、自我批评因子与抑郁障碍患者的抑郁程度、躯体症状、抑郁情绪症状存在低度相关;相对于依赖因子,自我批评因子能更稳定地预测抑郁患者的抑郁症状。     

抑郁体验问卷中文版在640名大学生中的信效度检验及两种评分系统比较

目的:利用国际上通用的两种评分系统分别考查抑郁体验问卷中文版(DEQ-C)的信度和效度,确立该问卷在我国的适用性.方法:640名大学生完成了DEQ-C的评定,分别采用了因素权重法和条目权重法进行评分.探索DEQ-C的内部一致性信度、重测信度、因素结构、区分效度和内容效度.结果:因素权重法评分:α系数男性为0.65～0.77,女性为0.68～0.72;重测信度系数男性为0.59～0.64,女性为0.58～0.75.条目权重法评分:α系数男性为0.73～0.85,女性为0.69～0.85;重测信度系数男性为0.55～0.80,女性为0.67～0.73.探索性因素分析获得了与原问卷相似的三因素结构,前三个因子解释的方差在男性为14.5%、6.9%和5.5%,总和为26.9%;女性为13.5%、6.9%和6.1%,总和为25.5%;各分量表之间的相关性研究提示,因素权重评分法符合原问卷的理论构想,即依赖性和自我批评性是两个独立的人格维度,而条目权重法则失去这个特点;采用两种评分方法均显示了良好的效标效度:其中依赖性与CES-D及心境和焦虑症状问卷(MASQ)的相关系数分别为0.38、0.43(P＜0.01)和0.34、0.36(P＜0.01);自我批评性与CES-D及MASQ的相关系数分别为0.59、0.63(P＜0.01)和0.57、0.63(P＜0.01).结论:DEQ的中文翻译版有良好的信度和效度,其中,因素权重评分法更适用于中国大学生样本.     

认知问卷（CQ）的中文修订

目的对Fennell认知问卷（CQ）进行中文修订,并考察其信度和效度。方法在完成问卷修订和预备测试的基础上,选取600名大学生进行了CQ和Beck抑郁量表（BDI）的测试,其中150名学生2周后参加了复测。分析中文修订版问卷的信、效度。结果问卷的内部一致性信度和重测信度比较理想,修订版的CQ总体信度达到0.80,验证性因素分析支持CQ的5维度模型,且构成各维度的题目也同原版问卷相同。结论该CQ中文修订版具有较高的信度和效度,可以作为大学生认知风格的测量工具。     

受艾滋病影响儿童歧视体验量表研究

目的：发展受艾滋病影响儿童歧视体验量表并测试其信、效度。方法：采用非定式、半定式访谈，专家咨询，文献回顾等方法，写出量表的条目池；经Delphi．条目分析筛选条目形成的量表。量表应用于229名受试者测试信、效度。结果：因子分析形成行为躲避、情绪焦虑、情感厌恶、老师效应、邻里效应五个分量表，解释的总变异量62．4％。量表各条目与总分的相关系数在0．163—0．751之间，分量表与总分的相关系数在0．468—0．860之间。歧视与抑郁之间呈正相关关系（r=0．371，P=0．031）。重测信度0．812。量表总分，因子1-因子5的Cronbaeh’s α系数分别为0．948，0．930，0．926，0．867，0．836，0．853。结论：受艾滋病影响儿童歧视体验量表具有较好的信度、效度。     

CES—D的结构分析及其在成年人的试用

目的：本研究旨在通过对ＣＥＳ－Ｄ结构的因素分析，以期建立关于该量表的结构方程模型，同时探讨该量表在中国成年人中的试用情况。方法：４５３名被试，男２１９人，女２３４人，年龄２０～８５岁。采用ＣＥＳ－Ｄ中译本，在北京地区取样，由主试登门对被试进行测查。结果：（１）验证性因素分析表明，ＣＥＳ－Ｄ可分成四个因子，即无助与无望感、健康、压抑情感、躯体反应，此四个因子在抑郁体验上的负荷在０．６０～０．９６，分别可以解释抑郁体验变异的３６％～９３％；（２）同质信度和分半信度分别为０．８６７９和０．８５２６；（３）无助与无望感、压抑感及抑郁总分随年龄增长显著下降，心理健康因子得分随年龄增长显著升高。结论：ＣＥＳ－Ｄ具有较好的结构效度，用于中国成人具有较好的信度，可以用于评定中国成年人的抑郁体验及其特征。     

老年人痴呆筛查问卷的编制和信效度研究

目的：编制一个用于老年人痴呆筛查的问卷．检验问卷的信度和效度。方法：借鉴MMSE和ADL的评定范武编制一个以评估认知缺陷为核心，兼顾日常生活能力、精神症状和人格改变等内容的痴呆筛查问卷（简称DSI—E），包含11个领域55个条目：存2815名社区样本、215名重测样本和199名效度样本中，检验问卷的重测信度、同质信度和结构效度。结果：问卷总分的重测相关、分半相关和α系数分别为0．96，0．91和0．85；新编问卷与MMSE、ADL、MMAS记忆商数和CCAS智商的相关分别为0．92、0．89、0．71和0．63；因素分析获得3个因子．分别命名为认知能力、生活能力和精神病理．可解释60．1％的方差。结论：新编痴呆筛查问卷的信度和效度较理想．符合心理测量学要求。     

认知倾向问卷在儿童和少年情绪障碍患者中的信效度检验

目的：引进和考察认知倾向问卷（CAOT）的信度和效度，并进行初步临床应用。方法：将CAOT译成中文，并回译。以205例儿童少年情绪障碍患者和156例正常对照者为样本进行信度、效度评定。结果：①中文版CAOT总量表内部一致性α系数为0．683，各条目与总量表总的内部一致性系数在0．591—0．719之间；重测信度为0．625。②探索性因素分析证实了两个主要因子，即乐观和悲观因子，负荷量〉10．4的共有7个条目。实证效度具有较好的区分能力。结论：认知倾向问卷（CAOT）中文版经初步测试，信度、效度符合要求，具有临床应用价值。     

“应付方式问卷”效度与信度研究

“应付方式问卷”的效度与信度研究分两阶段进行。第一阶段，在普通人群组中对“应付方式问卷”初稿作效度的预研究；第二阶段，在青少年学生组和神经症－对照组中分别对“应付方式问卷”修订稿进行效度与信度的研究。用因子分析检验其构造效度：采取平均正交旋转，按程序默认的因子提取原则，特征值〉１，提取因子，各因子由因子内因素负荷大于或等于０．３５条目组成。     

Reliability and validity of the short form Beck Depression Inventory with older adults

This study investigated the reliability and validity of the short form Beck Depression Inventory with older adults. Sixty-one clinically depressed older outpatients and 57 non-patient older volunteers comprised the sample. The patient group completed the BDI prior to and at completion of depression treatment. Estimates of internal reliability suggest that the short form BDI possesses adequate Spearman-Brown and alpha coefficients. Congruent validity estimates were less satisfactory, as the correlation between the BDI and the HRSD was statistically significant, but low. Criterion group validity, diagnostic sensitivity, and sensitivity to change estimates were all acceptable. Thus, the short form BDI is adequately reliable to suggest its use as a research and clinical tool with older adults, although further study of the instrument's validity is needed.     

Is self-criticism unique for depression? A comparison with social phobia

BACKGROUND: This study further examined the diagnostic specificity of the self-critical personality dimension, as measured by the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt et al., 1976. The Depressive Experiences Questionnaire. Yale University Press, New Haven). METHODS: Patients with major depression (n=26) were compared to social phobia patients (n=32). RESULTS: Depressed patients scored significantly higher on the DEQ Self-Criticism dimension. However, when current level of depressed mood was controlled for, self-criticism was not a significant predictor of diagnostic status. Further, the level of DEQ self-criticism reported by patients with social phobia was almost three times greater than the level reported in an earlier diagnostic specificity study with panic disorder patients [Bagby et al., 1992. Diagnostic specificity of the dependent and self-critical personality dimensions in major depression. J. Affect. Disord. 26, 59-64]. LIMITATIONS: Only one measure of self-criticism was used in this study, and the research design was cross-sectional rather than prospective. CONCLUSIONS: Self-criticism is not unique to major depression, and this personality dimension may be implicated in other forms of psychopathology [Blatt, 1991. A cognitive morphology of psychopathology. J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 179, 449-458]. Some cognitive features believed to play an important role in depression may also be salient in persons with social phobia.     

An interactive-synergetic approach to the assessment of personality vulnerability to depression: Illustration using the adolescent version of the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire

Research on personality vulnerability to depression is characterized by a "main effect" approach, often at the expense of examining interactions among various dimensions of vulnerability. To compare the "main effect" and "interactive-synergetic" approaches, we utilized data from a longitudinal study of adolescent adjustment. Focusing on dependency, self-criticism, and efficacy, the three factors of the adolescent version of the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt, Schaffer, Bers, & Quinlan, 1992), we found support for the interactive-synergetic approach. Dependency and self-criticism interacted in predicting changes in depressive and internalizing symptoms (under low efficacy), and among boys-changes in internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Results illuminate the synergetic interplay among dimensions of risk and resilience in clinical research and practice.     

脑卒中失语抑郁量表的试修订

目的：引进脑卒中失语抑郁量表（SADQ）并评价其信度、效度,为该量表在中国的应用推广提供有用的信息.方法：对105名脑卒中患者进行Hamilton抑郁量表（HAMD）测评,并协助患者完成BDI,同时由患者陪护人员完成SADQ量表,其中30名患者的陪护者被要求2周后进行SADQ复查.结果：①重测信度0.754;②Cronbach＇sα系数为0.809,分半信度为0.743;③因素分析共产生7个因子,共解释了65.641%的方差;④SADQ与BDI的相关为0.548（P＜0.01）;SADQ与HAMD的相关为0.488（P＜0.01）.结论：SADQ的修订版具有良好的信度和效度,基本符合心理测量学标准.     

白熊抑制问卷中文版信、效度研究

目的:检验白熊抑制问卷中文版在中国大学生中的信度和效度。方法:用中文版白熊抑制问卷先后测量了396名大学生,并在4周后对其中68人进行了重测。被试同时完成了贝克抑郁量表、状态-特质焦虑问卷及强迫症状问卷。结果:①验证性因素分析结果支持问卷的单因素结构;②白熊抑制问卷总分与贝克抑郁量表、强迫症状问卷总分、状态焦虑、特质焦虑总分均存在显著相关;③总量表的α系数为0.83,4周后的重测相关系数为0.82。结论:中文版白熊抑制问卷具有较好的信、效度,可以用来测量我国大学生的思维抑制倾向。     

大学生手机过当依赖量表的编制与信效度检验

目的:编制用于测量识别非手机成瘾的大学生手机过当依赖量表(MEDS-C),并进行信效度检验。方法:通过综述法与访谈法编制包含30个项目的初步量表,对682名大学生进行施测。经项目分析、探索性因子分析(n=338)与验证性因子分析(n=310)进行结构效度测量,另抽取34名大学生进行间隔时长为2周的前后重测以获得重测信度。结果:通过因子分析获得4因子结构和3因子结构量表,经比较,3因子结构量表与预设结构相符且各项指标拟合度更优。3因子EDMS-C包含突显行为、低效性和安抚性3个维度共9个项目,各因子负荷在0.56~0.83,方差累计解释率为56.48%。量表结构效度良好(χ~2=49.86,df=24,χ~2/df=2.01,RMR=0.05,GFI=0.97,AGFI=0.94,CFI=0.96,RMSEA=0.06);效标效度为0.79;量表内部一致信度不低于其Cronbachα系数0.78,3个因子的系数在0.58~0.77之间;量表总重测信度为0.81,3个因子的重测信度在0.56~0.68之间。结论:本研究编制的大学生手机过当依赖量表具有较好的信效度,可用于筛别大学生中对手机过当依赖的非成瘾者。     

What do beginning students,in a rurally focused medical course,think about rural practice?

Medical students face a variety of stressors associated with their education; if not promptly identified and adequately dealt with, it may bring about several negative consequences in terms of mental health and academic performance. This study examined psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Higher Education Stress Inventory (K-HESI). The reliability and validity of the K-HESI were examined in a large scale multi-site survey involving 7110 medical students. The K-HESI, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and questions regarding quality of life (QOL) and self-rated physical health (SPH) were administered. Exploratory factor analysis of the K-HESI identified seven factors: Low commitment; financial concerns; teacher-student relationship; worries about future profession; non-supportive climate; workload; and dissatisfaction with education. A subsequent confirmatory factor analysis supported the 7-factor model. Internal consistency of the K-HESI was satisfactory (Cronbach’s α?=?.78). Convergent validity was demonstrated by its positive association with the BDI. Known group validity was supported by the K-HESI’s ability to detect significant differences on the overall and subscale scores of K-HESI according to different levels of QOL and SPH. The K-HESI is a psychometrically valid tool that comprehensively assesses various relevant stressors related to medical education. Evidence-based stress management in medical education empirically guided by the regular assessment of stress using reliable and valid measure is warranted.     

Validity and reliability of the Beck Depression Inventory-Short Form in a group of adult bereaved females.

This study investigated the reliability and validity of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) Short Form in a group of female bereaved adults. Two hundred fifty-five community-based women bereaved less than 2 years completed the BDI. Estimate of the alpha coefficient indicates that the short-form BDI possesses adequate internal reliability for this sample. Principal-component factor analysis indicated a two-factor model for depression associated with bereavement. The first factor, which combined items related to anergy and dysphoria, corresponded to the affective and behavioral components of depression, while the second factor related to the cognitive domain of depression and was associated with a negative self-esteem.     

自动思维问卷的信度和效度研究

80年代开始 ,人们在研究抑郁症的病因学时 ,重视社会环境因素和认知心理因素的相互作用对抑郁症的影响。Ｂｅｃｋ认为 ,抑郁症以认知歪曲为突出表现 ,对自我、未来和世界持消极看法 ;而它的病理心理学有四个主要成份 :抑郁认知三联症、认知歪曲、自动思维和潜在的抑郁性认知图式[1] 。为评价与抑郁有关的消极性自动思维 ,Ｈｏｌｌｏｎ＆Ｋｅｎｄａｌｌ1980年设计了自动思维问卷 (ＡｕｔｏｍａｔｉｃＴｈｏｕｇｈｔｓＱｕｅｓｔｉｏｎｎａｉｒｅＡＴＱ) ,用于评价抑郁患者内在的认知体验[2 ] 。国内外学者用该问卷对抑郁症做过一些研究 ,结果…     

生活定向测验在大学生中的信效度

目的:检验气质性乐观测量量表-生活定向测验(LOT)在大学生群体应用的信度和效度。方法:按量表双翻程序将LOT翻译成中文版。方便抽取479名大学生进行LOT测验。采用验证性因素分析对其结构效度进行分析,以生活满意度量表(SWLS)、积极-消极情感量表(PANAS)、Beck抑郁量表(BDI)作为校标工具。随机选取152名学生于初评2周后进行重测,以检验其重测效度。结果:LOT中文版共6个题项,所有题项的决断值(CR)均达到0.001的显著水平,每个题项与对应量表的相关系数在0.61～0.74之间。验证性因素分析表明,中国大学生的气质性乐观是2因素模型结构(χ2/df=1.90,RM-SEA=0.059,NNFI=0.92,CFI=0.96),由2个相对独立的乐观因子和悲观因子组成。气质性乐观因子与SWLS、积极情感得分呈正相关(r=0.22、0.28,均P0.01),与消极情感和BDI得分呈负相关(r=-0.17、-0.23,均P0.01),悲观因子与SWLS和积极情感得分呈负相关(r=-0.22,-0.23,均P0.01),与消极情感和BDI得分呈正相关(r=0.15、0.12,均P0.05)。量表两个因子的内部一致性信度Cronbachα系数分别是0.73和0.82,2周后的重测信度分别是0.76和0.79。结论:生活定向测验中文版具有较好的信度和效度,可用于评定中国大学生的气质性乐观水平。