Self-report measures pertinent for personality disorder are widely used and many are available. Their relative merits are usually assessed on nomothetic psychometrics and acceptability to users is neglected. We report reactions of lay, patient and professional groups to the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire (PDQ-IV); Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-III); the Borderline Syndrome Index (BSI); Rosenberg's Self-Esteem Scale (RSE) and the Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ). These were sent to 148 professionals, ex-patients and lay people for comment. Thirty-six per cent were returned. Pattern-coding by three raters revealed problematic themes across all measures, including inappropriate length, vague items and language, cultural assumptions and slang, state-bias and response-set. Measures can be depressing and upsetting for some participants (both patients and non-patients), hence administration of measures should be sensitive. Treatment may make people more self-aware, which may compromise validity for outcome research. This evaluation raises issues and concerns, which are missed in traditional psychometric evaluation.

译文

与人格障碍相关的自我报告措施被广泛使用,并且有许多可用。它们的相对优点通常是通过精神心理测量学来评估的,而忽略了用户的可接受性。我们报告了外行,患者和专业团体对人格诊断问卷 (pdq-iv) 的反应; Millon临床多轴量表 (mcmi-iii); 临界综合征指数 (BSI); 罗森伯格的自尊量表 (RSE) 和社会功能问卷 (SFQ)。这些被发送给148专业人士,前患者和非专业人士发表评论。退还了36%。三个评价者的模式编码揭示了所有措施中存在问题的主题,包括不适当的长度,模糊的项目和语言,文化假设和语,状态偏见和响应集。对于某些参与者 (患者和非患者),措施可能会令人沮丧和沮丧,因此措施的管理应该是敏感的。治疗可能会使人们更加自我意识,这可能会损害结果研究的有效性。该评估提出了传统心理评估中遗漏的问题和担忧。

+1
+2
100研值 100研值 ¥99课程
检索文献一次
下载文献一次

去下载>

成功解锁2个技能,为你点赞

《SCI写作十大必备语法》
解决你的SCI语法难题!

技能熟练度+1

视频课《玩转文献检索》
让你成为检索达人!

恭喜完成新手挑战

手机微信扫一扫,添加好友领取

免费领《Endnote文献管理工具+教程》

微信扫码, 免费领取

手机登录

获取验证码
登录