|
|
高敏感人群量表中文版修订及信效度检验
|
Abstract:
目的：翻译与修订Walda (2007)改编的高敏感人群量表，以大学生为测验对象，探讨量表的因素结构并进行信效度检验。方法：按翻译程序将高敏感人群量表翻译成中文版，向大学生发放3112份问卷，并进行项目分析、探索性因素分析、验证性因素分析、信度分析和校标效度分析。结果：修订后的高敏感人群中文版量表包含易激发性，暴力低感觉阈限，审美敏感性三个维度，共保留11个条目，累计方差解释率为51.9%。验证性因素分析结果表明双因子模型的拟合指数(χ2 = 145.696, df = 33, CFI = 0.989, TLI = 0.982, RMSEA = 0.034, SRMR = 0.019)优于传统单维模型和三维模型。总量表的合成信度(ω)为0.83，Cronbach α系数为0.66。结论：高敏感人群量表中文修订版在我国大学生被试群体中具有较好的信效度，可用于测量我国大学生环境敏感性的有效工具。
Objectives: Translation and revision of Walda’s (2007) high-sensitivity scale was conducted to examine the factor structure and reliability of the scale using university students as the test sub-jects. Methods: A total of 3112 college students were enrolled to complete the Chinese version of High-Sensitivity Scale. The structural validity of HSC-38 was tested through item analysis, explo-ratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reliability analysis, concur-rent validity analysis. Results: The Chinese version of High-Sensitivity Scale consisted of 11 items, and three subscales were respectively named ease of excitation, violent low sensory threshold, and aesthetic sensitivity, and a total of 11 items were retained and the cumulative variance interpretation rate was 51.9%. CFA results showed that the fit indices of the bifactor model (χ2 = 145.696, df = 33, CFI = 0.989, TLI = 0.982, RMSEA = 0.034, SRMR = 0.019) was better than the traditional unidimensional and three-dimensional models. The composite reliability (ω) of the total scale was 0.83 and the Cronbach alpha coefficient was 0.66. Conclusions: The revised Chinese version of the High-Sensitivity Scale has good reliability and validity in the group of college students in China and can be used to measure the environmental sensitivity.
| [1] | 顾红磊, 温忠麟(2017). 多维测验分数的报告与解释: 基于双因子模型的视角. 心理发展与教育, 33(4), 504-512. |
| [2] | 顾红磊, 温忠麟, 方杰(2014). 双因子模型: 多维构念测量的新视角. 心理科学, 37(4), 973-979. |
| [3] | 岐部智恵子, 平野真理(2019). 日本語版青年前期用敏感性尺度(HSCS-A)の作成. パーソナリティ研究, 28(2), 108-118.
https://doi.org/10.2132/personality.28.2.1 |
| [4] | Aron, E. N., & Aron, A. (1997). Sensory-Processing Sensitivity and Its Relation to Introversion and Emotionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 345-368. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.2.345 |
| [5] | Aron, E. N., Aron, A., & Jagiellowicz, J. (2012). Sensory Processing Sensitivity: A Review in the Light of the Evolution of Biological Responsivity. Personality and Social Psy-chology Review, 16, 262-282.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311434213 |
| [6] | Chen, F., Hayes, A., Carver, C., Laurenceau, J.-P., & Zhang, Z. (2011). Modeling General and Specific Variance in Multifaceted Constructs: A Comparison of the Bifactor Model to Other Approaches. Journal of Personality, 80, 219-251.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00739.x |
| [7] | Evans, D. E., & Rothbart, M. K. (2008). Temperamental Sensitivity: Two Constructs or One? Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 108-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.07.016 |
| [8] | Lionetti, F., Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Burns, G. L., Jagiellowicz, J., & Pluess, M. (2018). Dandelions, Tulips and Orchids: Evidence for the Existence of Low-Sensitive, Medium-Sensitive and High-Sensitive Individuals. Translational Psychiatry, 8, Article No. 24. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-017-0090-6 |
| [9] | Pluess, M. (2015). Individual Differences in Environmental Sensitivity. Child Development Perspectives, 9, 138-143.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12120 |
| [10] | Pluess, M., Assary, E., Lionetti, F., Lester, K. J., Krapohl, E., Aron, E. N., & Aron, A. (2018). Environmental Sensitivity in Children: Development of the Highly Sensitive Child Scale and Identification of Sensitivity Groups. Developmental Psychology, 54, 51-70. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000406 |
| [11] | ？engül-？nal, G., & Sümer, N. (2020). Exploring the Multidimensional Structure of Sensory Processing Sensitivity in Turkish Samples. Current Psychology, 39, 194-206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9751-0 |
| [12] | Smolewska, K. A., McCabe, S. B., & Woody, E. Z. (2006). A Psychometric Evaluation of the Highly Sensitive Person Scale: The Components of Sensory-Processing Sensitivity and Their Relation to the BIS/BAS and “Big Five”. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1269-1279. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886905003909
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.09.022 |
| [13] | Walda, S. (2007). Hoogsensitiviteit bij Kinderen in het Basison-derwijs. Radboud Universiteit, scriptie voor het doctoraalexamen. |
| [14] | Zhang, X., Wang, M.-C., He, L., Jie, L., & Deng, J. (2019). The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory-15. PLOS ONE, 14, e0221621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221621 |
