摘要
目的 :修订并检验简明心境量表 (BPOMS)的信度和效度。方法 :对 886名大学生实施该量表 ,并对其中 74人间隔 9天评定重测信度。随机抽取 87名门诊初诊神经症患者进行BPOMS、抑郁自评量表(SDS)和焦虑自评量表 (SAS)的测查 ,评定效标效度。选取 87名年龄、性别和文化与病例组相匹配的正常个体为对照组填写BPOMS ,评定区分效度。结果 :BPOMS的重测信度系数在 0 40 6～ 0 664之间 ,α系数在0 70 5～ 0 890之间 ,具有较满意的信度。原量表共有 6个维度 ,本研究对BPOMS进行因素分析后提取了 5个维度 ,仍能够合理地解释该量表的结构。修订后BPOMS的“抑郁”维度与SDS、“紧张”维度与SAS的相关系数分别为 0 60 5和 0 60 2 (P <0 0 1) ,神经症组与对照组在BPOMS和各维度的得分均有显著性的差异 (P<0 0 1) ,说明BPOMS有良好的区分效度和效标效度。结论 :该量表具有良好的信效度 ,是测量个体心境状态简便易行的工具。
Objective:To revise and test the reliability and validity of Brief Profile Of Mood States (BPOMS). Method:Eight hundred and eighty-six college students were examined by BPOMS, and seventy-four of them were retested in order to assess the test-retest reliability.To assess the criterion validity, eighty-seven out-patients with neurosis and eighty-seven normal subjects matched with the patients in age, gender and literacy were sampled and they were examined by BPOMS together with SDS and SAS. Result: BPOMS had a satisfactory reliability with a 0.41-0.66 test-retest reliability and the α coefficient was 0.71-0.89. Though the original scale had 6 dimensions, the 5 dimensions acquired by factor analysis of the Chinese version still justified the structure of BPOMS. After revision, the coefficient of correlation between the dimension'depression' and SDS was 0.605, and that between'tense' and SAS was 0.602. A significant difference was found between the test group and the control group in the score of total BPOMS and that of every dimension, so the revised BPOMS had ideal discriminate validity and criterion validity. Conclusion:With satisfactory reliability and validity, the revised edition of BPOMS is a convenient instrument for mood measurement.
出处
《中国心理卫生杂志》
CSSCI
CSCD
北大核心
2003年第11期768-770,767,共4页
Chinese Mental Health Journal
基金
中国科学院创新工程项目 (KSCX2 - 2- 0 3)资助
国家自然科学重点基金项目资助
