Psychometric properties of the chinese version of multidimensional experiential avoidance questionnaire-30.
Classical test theory
Experiential avoidance
Measurement invariance
Multidimensional item response theory
Journal
BMC psychology
ISSN: 2050-7283
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101627676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 May 2024
24 May 2024
Historique:
received:
09
03
2024
accepted:
15
05
2024
medline:
25
5
2024
pubmed:
25
5
2024
entrez:
24
5
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Experiential avoidance represents the tendency to avoid negative internal experiences, which is a key concept in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. However, existing measures of experiential avoidance (i.e., Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II, AAQ-II) have some limitations. This study aims to assess the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire-30 (MEAQ-30) and provide evidence for the reliability and validity of this new instrument. Two questionnaire surveys were conducted. The first sample (N = 546) was analyzed using classical test theory (CTT), and the second sample (N = 511) was analyzed using multidimensional item response theory (MIRT). CTT supported the six-factor structure of MEAQ-30, indicating good internal consistency and measurement invariance across genders. Furthermore, the Chinese version of MEAQ-30 showed satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity. The incremental validity test showed that after controlling for the effects of neuroticism and AAQ-II, the Chinese version of MEAQ-30 could still significantly predict depression, anxiety, and stress. MIRT indicated that 30 items had good discrimination and difficulty, and the six subscales were sufficiently reliable across the continuum of experiential avoidance. The Chinese version of MEAQ-30 has good reliability and validity and is suitable for assessing experiential avoidance among Chinese populations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Experiential avoidance represents the tendency to avoid negative internal experiences, which is a key concept in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. However, existing measures of experiential avoidance (i.e., Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II, AAQ-II) have some limitations. This study aims to assess the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire-30 (MEAQ-30) and provide evidence for the reliability and validity of this new instrument.
METHODS
METHODS
Two questionnaire surveys were conducted. The first sample (N = 546) was analyzed using classical test theory (CTT), and the second sample (N = 511) was analyzed using multidimensional item response theory (MIRT).
RESULTS
RESULTS
CTT supported the six-factor structure of MEAQ-30, indicating good internal consistency and measurement invariance across genders. Furthermore, the Chinese version of MEAQ-30 showed satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity. The incremental validity test showed that after controlling for the effects of neuroticism and AAQ-II, the Chinese version of MEAQ-30 could still significantly predict depression, anxiety, and stress. MIRT indicated that 30 items had good discrimination and difficulty, and the six subscales were sufficiently reliable across the continuum of experiential avoidance.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The Chinese version of MEAQ-30 has good reliability and validity and is suitable for assessing experiential avoidance among Chinese populations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38790020
doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-01790-x
pii: 10.1186/s40359-024-01790-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
290Subventions
Organisme : Humanity and Social Science Research Base Key Project of the Ministry of Education of China
ID : 22JJD190011
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Hayes SC, Wilson KG, Gifford EV, Follette VM, Strosahl K. Experiential avoidance and behavioral disorders: a functional dimensional approach to diagnosis and treatment. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1996;64(6):1152–68. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.64.6.1152 .
doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.64.6.1152
pubmed: 8991302
Chawla N, Ostafin B. Experiential avoidance as a functional dimensional approach to psychopathology: an empirical review. J Clin Psychol. 2007;63(9):871–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20400 .
doi: 10.1002/jclp.20400
pubmed: 17674402
Borgogna NC, McDermott RC, Berry A, Lathan EC, Gonzales J. A multicultural examination of experiential avoidance: AAQ – II measurement comparisons across Asian American, Black, Latinx, Middle Eastern, and White college students. J Context Behav Sci. 2020;16:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.01.011 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.01.011
Berman NC, Wheaton MG, McGrath P, Abramowitz JS. Predicting anxiety: the role of experiential avoidance and anxiety sensitivity. J Anxiety Disord. 2010;24(1):109–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2009.09.005 .
doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2009.09.005
pubmed: 19819106
Mellick WH, Mills JA, Kroska EB, Calarge CA, Sharp C, Dindo LN. Experiential avoidance predicts persistence of major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder in late adolescence. J Clin Psychiatry. 2019;80(6):6949. https://doi.org/10.4088/jcp.18m12265 .
doi: 10.4088/jcp.18m12265
Thompson BL, Waltz J. Mindfulness and experiential avoidance as predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder avoidance symptom severity. J Anxiety Disord. 2010;24(4):409–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.02.005 .
doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.02.005
pubmed: 20304602
Wang W, Wang X. Non-suicidal self-injury in Chinese college students with elevated autistic traits: associations with anxiety, rumination and experiential avoidance. Compr Psychiatry. 2023;126:152407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2023.152407 .
doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2023.152407
pubmed: 37566951
Liu H, Wang W, Yang J, Guo F, Yin Z. The effects of alexithymia, experiential avoidance, and childhood sexual abuse on non-suicidal self-injury and suicidal ideation among Chinese college students with a history of childhood sexual abuse. J Affect Disord. 2021;282:272–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.12.181 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.12.181
pubmed: 33418378
Zhang C-Q, Li X, Si G, Chung P-K, Huang Z, Gucciardi DF. Examining the roles of experiential avoidance and cognitive fusion on the effects from mindfulness to athlete burnout: a longitudinal study. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2023;64:102341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102341 .
doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102341
pubmed: 37665822
Hayes SC, Strosahl K, Wilson KG, Bissett RT, Pistorello J, Toarmino D, Polusny MA, Dykstra TA, Batten SV, Bergan J, et al. Measuring experiential avoidance: a preliminary test of a working model. Psychol Rec. 2004;54(4):553–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395492 .
doi: 10.1007/BF03395492
Bond FW, Hayes SC, Baer RA, Carpenter KM, Guenole N, Orcutt HK, Waltz T, Zettle RD. Preliminary Psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire–II: a revised measure of psychological inflexibility and experiential avoidance. Behav Ther. 2011;42(4):676–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2011.03.007 .
doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2011.03.007
pubmed: 22035996
Karekla M, Michaelides MP. Validation and invariance testing of the Greek adaptation of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire -II across clinical vs. nonclinical samples and sexes. J Context Behav Sci. 2017;6(1):119–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2016.11.006 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2016.11.006
Masuda A, Mandavia A, Tully EC. The role of psychological inflexibility and mindfulness in somatization, Depression, and anxiety among Asian americans in the United States. Asian Am J Psychol. 2014;5(3):230–6. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034437 .
doi: 10.1037/a0034437
Tyndall I, Waldeck D, Pancani L, Whelan R, Roche B, Dawson DL. The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II) as a measure of experiential avoidance: concerns over discriminant validity. J Context Behav Sci. 2018;12:278–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.09.005 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.09.005
Rochefort C, Baldwin AS, Chmielewski M. Experiential avoidance: an examination of the Construct Validity of the AAQ-II and MEAQ. Behav Ther. 2018;49(3):435–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2017.08.008 .
doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2017.08.008
pubmed: 29704971
Wolgast M. What does the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ-II). Really Measure? Behav Ther. 2014;45(6):831–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2014.07.002 .
doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2014.07.002
pubmed: 25311291
Mershon B, Gorsuch RLJJP, Psychology S. Number of factors in the personality sphere: does increase in factors increase predictability of real-life criteria? J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;55(4):675.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.55.4.675
Gámez W, Chmielewski M, Kotov R, Ruggero C, Watson D. Development of a measure of experiential avoidance: the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire. Psychol Assess. 2011;23(3):692–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023242 .
doi: 10.1037/a0023242
pubmed: 21534697
Conley SL, Lee SR, Martyn HF, Wu KD. Facets of experiential avoidance differentially predict engagement in a contamination-based behavioral approach task. J Obsessive Compuls Relat Disord. 2019;22:100453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocrd.2019.100453 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jocrd.2019.100453
Sahdra BK, Ciarrochi J, Parker P, Scrucca L. Using genetic algorithms in a large nationally Representative American Sample to abbreviate the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire. Front Psychol. 2016;7:189. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00189 .
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00189
pubmed: 26941672
pmcid: 4764703
Gámez W, Chmielewski M, Kotov R, Ruggero C, Suzuki N, Watson D. The brief experiential avoidance questionnaire: development and initial validation. Psychol Assess. 2014;26(1):35–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034473 .
doi: 10.1037/a0034473
pubmed: 24059474
Schaeuffele C, Knaevelsrud C, Renneberg B, Boettcher J. Psychometric properties of the German brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (BEAQ). Assessment. 2021;29(7):1406–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911211010955 .
doi: 10.1177/10731911211010955
pubmed: 34044602
Yarkoni T. The abbreviation of personality, or how to measure 200 personality scales with 200 items. J Res Pers. 2010;44(2):180–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.01.002 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2010.01.002
pubmed: 20419061
pmcid: 2858332
Den Ouden L, Tiego J, Lee RSC, Albertella L, Greenwood LM, Fontenelle L, Yucel M, Segrave R. The role of Experiential Avoidance in transdiagnostic compulsive behavior: a structural model analysis. Addict Behav. 2020;108:106464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106464 .
doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106464
pubmed: 32428802
Seçer İ, Ulaş S. An investigation of the Effect of COVID-19 on OCD in Youth in the context of emotional reactivity, experiential avoidance, depression and anxiety. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2020;19(6):2306–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00322-z .
doi: 10.1007/s11469-020-00322-z
pubmed: 32837429
pmcid: 7293436
Ekşi H, Kaya Ç, Kuşcu B. Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire-30: Adaptation and psychometric properties of the Turkish version. In: 8th International Conference on Research in Education, Manisa, Turkey: 2018.
Cao H, Mak YW, Li HY, Leung DYP. Chinese validation of the brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (BEAQ) in college students. J Context Behav Sci. 2021;19:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2021.01.004 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2021.01.004
Lo HHM, Powell CLYM, Chan SHW, Leung BFH, Tsang EYH, Leung SSM. Validating an adapted version of the brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire in Hong Kong Chinese. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2023;45(1):207–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-022-10020-w .
doi: 10.1007/s10862-022-10020-w
Svicher A, Palazzeschi L, Gori A, Di Fabio A. The Gratitude resentment and appreciation test-revised short (GRAT-RS): a multidimensional item response theory analysis in Italian workers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(24):16786. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416786 .
doi: 10.3390/ijerph192416786
pubmed: 36554667
pmcid: 9779112
Doostfatemeh M, Haem E, Sarbaraninan M, Mehdi AT. Multidimensional item response theory to assess the psychometric properties of persian version of Dutch eating behavior questionnaire (DEBQ) in university students. Curr Psychol. 2022;42(16):13400–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02608-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-02608-4
Cao J, Ji Y, Zhu ZH. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II(AAQ-II) in college students. Chin Mental Health J. 2013;27(11):873–7.
Wang MC, Dai XY, Yao SQ. Development of the Chinese big five personality inventory (CBF-PI) III: psychometric properties of CBF-PI brief version. Chin J Clin Psychol. 2011;19(4):454–7. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2011.04.004 .
doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2011.04.004
Henry JD, Crawford JR. The short-form version of the Depression anxiety stress scales (DASS-21): construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. Br J Clin Psychol. 2005;44:227–39. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466505X29657 .
doi: 10.1348/014466505X29657
pubmed: 16004657
Gong X, Xie XY, Xu R, Luo YJ. Psychometric properties of the Chinese versions of DASS-21 in Chinese college students. Chin J Clin Psychol. 2010;18(4):443–6. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2010.04.020 .
doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2010.04.020
Lt H, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Modeling: Multidisciplinary J. 1999;6(1):1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 .
doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
Rutkowski L, Svetina D. Measurement invariance in international surveys: categorical indicators and fit measure performance. Appl Meas Educ. 2016;30(1):39–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1243540 .
doi: 10.1080/08957347.2016.1243540
Chalmers RP. Mirt: a Multidimensional Item Response Theory Package for the R environment. J Stat Softw. 2012;48(6):1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06 .
doi: 10.18637/jss.v048.i06
Muraki E, Carlson JE. Full-information factor analysis for polytomous item responses. Appl Psychol Meas. 1995;19(1):73–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169501900109 .
doi: 10.1177/014662169501900109
Maydeu-Olivares A, Joe H. Limited information goodness-of-fit testing in multidimensional contingency tables. Psychometrika. 2006;71(4):713–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-005-1295-9 .
doi: 10.1007/s11336-005-1295-9
Taylor JM. Psychometric analysis of the ten-item perceived stress scale. Psychol Assess. 2015;27(1):90–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038100 .
doi: 10.1037/a0038100
pubmed: 25346996
Reise SP, Henson JM. A discussion of modern Versus Traditional Psychometrics as Applied to Personality Assessment Scales. J Pers Assess. 2003;81(2):93–103. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8102_01 .
doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8102_01
pubmed: 12946916
Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford; 2023.
De Vaus D, de Vaus D. Surveys in social research. Routledge; 2013.
Ferrando PJ, Condon L, Chico E. The convergent validity of acquiescence: an empirical study relating balanced scales and separate acquiescence scales. Pers Individ Dif. 2004;37(7):1331–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.01.003 .
doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2004.01.003
Weijters B, Baumgartner H. Misresponse to reversed and negated items in surveys: a review. J Mark Res. 2012;49(5):737–47. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.11.0368 .
doi: 10.1509/jmr.11.0368
Maldonado-Murciano L, Pontes HM, Barrios M, Gómez-Benito J, Guilera G. Psychometric validation of the Spanish gaming disorder test (GDT): Item Response Theory and Measurement Invariance Analysis. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2021;21:1973–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-021-00704-x .
doi: 10.1007/s11469-021-00704-x
Ford BQ, Mauss IB. Culture and emotion regulation. Curr Opin Psychol. 2015;3:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2014.12.004 .
doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2014.12.004
pubmed: 25729757
pmcid: 4341898
Fang S, Huang M, Wang Y. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of personalized psychological flexibility index (C-PPFI) in college students. J Context Behav Sci. 2023;28:23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2023.03.008 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2023.03.008
Baker FB. The basics of item response theory: College Park., MD: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation; 2001.
Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NPJJ. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 .
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
pubmed: 14516251