论文部分内容阅读
目的对儿童期虐待史自评量表进行修订,检验其在大学生中的信效度。方法抽取2374名大学生进行儿童期虐待史自评量表(PRCA)、贝克抑郁自评问卷(BDI)、焦虑自评量表(SAS)和自杀意念量表(SIS)的测查。结果 1PRCA的4个分量表和总量表的内部一致性系数为0.604~0.839,间隔6周的重测信度为0.358~0.829(P<0.01)。修正模型中4个分量表的建构信度为0.626~0.717;2验证性因素分析显示,修正后模型的χ2/df<5.000,RMR、RMSEA<0.05,GFI、AGFI、NFI、RFI、IFI、TLI和CFI均>0.900,PGFI、PNFI、PCFI均>0.500,CAIC值小于饱和模型和独立模型;3PRCA的4个分量表分和总量表分分别与近1年SIS分、BDI分和SAS分呈正相关(r=0.084~0.326,P<0.01)。结论儿童期虐待史自评量表具有良好的信效度,可作为评估我国大学生儿童期受虐待情况的有效工具。
Objective To revise the self-rating scale of childhood abuse to test its reliability and validity in college students. Methods A total of 2374 undergraduates were included in this study. The self-assessment questionnaires of childhood abuse (PRCA), Beck’s depression self-assessment questionnaire (BDI), self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and suicidal ideation scale (SIS) Results The internal consistency coefficient of 4 subscales and the total scale of 1PRCA was 0.604-0.839, and the test-retest reliability was 0.358-0.829 (P <0.01) after 6 weeks. The reliability of the four subscales in the revised model was 0.626-0.717. 2 The confirmatory factor analysis showed that the χ2 / df <5.000, RMR, RMSEA <0.05, GFI, AGFI, NFI, RFI, IFI, TLI And CFI> 0.900, PGFI, PNFI and PCFI were all> 0.500, CAIC values were less than those of saturated model and independent model. The scores of 4 subscales and 3 subscales of 3PRCA were similar to those of SIS, BDI and SAS (R = 0.084 ~ 0.326, P <0.01). Conclusion The Childhood Abuse Self-rating Scale has good reliability and validity, which can be used as an effective tool to assess the abuse of childhood in our country.