背景:自我吸收是指过度,持久性,以及对自我信息的严格关注。本研究旨在将自我吸收量表(SAS)引入中国,并评估其潜在变量结构,网络结构,心理测量属性,和非临床中国样本中的临床效用。
方法:209名参与者完成了SAS翻译以及简短的一般健康问卷(GHQ-12)。反省-反思问卷(RRQ)的反省子量表,正念注意意识量表(MAAS),私人自我意识量表(PrSCS),强迫性量表修订(OCI-R)和分离经历量表(DES-II)。此外,30名受访者完成了中文版SAS,并在2周后进行了重新测试。
结果:中文版SAS(CH-SAS)具有理想的双相关因素结构,并删除了反向评分项目,在不同性别之间是不变的。CH-SAS网络结构中的核心项目与过度的自我沉浸有关,自我吸收的不可控性和焦虑方面。CH-SAS的Cronbach\α系数为0.903,而McDonald\的omega系数为0.916,重测可靠性为0.908。CH-SAS及其两个分量表与RRQ的反思性分量表(范围为0.474至0.616;p<.001)和GHQ-12(范围为0.479至0.538;p<.001)具有中度正相关,与MAAS呈中度负相关(范围为-0.413至-0.360;p<.001)。PrSCS与CH-SAS和PrSAS几乎没有相关性(p>0.05),其与PubSAS的相关性在0.05水平上显著,相关系数非常低(r=0.157)。分层回归分析表明,CH-SAS可以显著预测强迫症的严重程度,焦虑,沉思,解离,注意注意意识。
结论:CH-SAS具有出色的可靠性,包括内部一致性和重测可靠性。此外,它表现出良好的结构有效性,以及收敛和发散有效性的有力证据。此外,使用CH-SAS测量的自我吸收对OCD的预测贡献显着超过其他相关心理因素,表明其临床实用性。
BACKGROUND: Self-absorption refers an excessive, persistent, and rigid preoccupation with information regarding the self. This study aims to introduce the Self-Absorption Scale (SAS) into China with an assessment of its latent variable structure, network structure, psychometric properties, and clinical utility in a nonclinical Chinese sample.
METHODS: 209 participants completed the translated SAS as well as the Short General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), rumination subscale of the Rumination-Reflection Questionnaire (RRQ), the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS), the Private Self-Consciousness Scale (PrSCS), the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised (OCI-R) and the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES-II). In addition, 30 respondents completed the Chinese version of the SAS and retested it 2 weeks later.
RESULTS: The Chinese version of the SAS (CH-SAS) had a desirable two-correlated-factor structure with the reverse scored item removed, which was invariant across different genders. The core items in the network structure of the CH-SAS were related to excessive self-immersion, uncontrollability and anxiety aspects of self-absorption. The Cronbach\'s alpha coefficient for the CH-SAS was 0.903 while the McDonald\'s omega coefficient was 0.916 and the test-retest reliability was 0.908. The CH-SAS and its two subscales had moderate positive correlations with the rumination subscale of the RRQ (ranging from 0.474 to 0.616; p < .001) and the GHQ-12 (ranging from 0.479 to 0.538; p < .001), and moderate negative correlations with the MAAS (ranging from - 0.413 to - 0.360; p < .001). The PrSCS has almost no correlation with the CH-SAS and PrSAS (p > .05), and its correlation with the PubSAS was significant at the 0.05 level, with a remarkably low correlation coefficient (r = .157). The hierarchical regression analysis suggested that the CH-SAS can significantly predict the severity of OCD beyond factors such as depression, anxiety, rumination, dissociation, and mindful attention awareness.
CONCLUSIONS: The CH-SAS demonstrates excellent reliability, including internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Additionally, it exhibits favorable structural validity, as well as strong evidence of convergent and divergent validity. Furthermore, the self-absorption measured using the CH-SAS contributed significantly to the prediction of OCD beyond other relevant psychological factors, suggesting its clinical utility.