A review of AAQ variants and other context-specific measures of psychological flexibility
| Autor: | Clarissa W. Ong, Michael E. Levin, Eric B. Lee, Michael P. Twohig |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Elsevier |
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
050103 clinical psychology
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management Health (social science) psychometric assessment psychological flexibility Acceptance and commitment therapy 03 medical and health sciences Behavioral Neuroscience 0302 clinical medicine 0501 psychology and cognitive sciences Applied Psychology Ecology Evolution Behavior and Systematics Critical variable Scope (project management) Educational Psychology Clinical study design 05 social sciences acceptance and action questionnaire Discriminant validity Flexibility (personality) 030227 psychiatry acceptance and commitment therapy Psychology Construct (philosophy) Incremental validity Cognitive psychology |
| Zdroj: | Psychology Faculty Publications |
| ISSN: | 2212-1447 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.jcbs.2019.02.007 |
| Popis: | Psychological flexibility refers to a way of interacting with internal experiences and the external environment that advances one toward chosen values whereas psychological inflexibility reflects rigid adherence to ineffective responses such that valued living is compromised. Psychological flexibility is a critical variable of interest in acceptance and commitment therapy, thus, accurate assessment of this construct is pertinent to professionals in the field. Numerous measures of psychological flexibility for specific conditions exist and the psychometric validation of each of these measures varies in breadth and depth. To orient professionals to the scope of available measures as well as their psychometric properties, the current review summarizes the existing literature on context-specific measures of psychological flexibility. Most measures demonstrated satisfactory basic psychometric properties, though their clinical utility (e.g., treatment sensitivity) has largely been underexplored. Generally, context-specific measures performed better than a generic measure of psychological flexibility with respect to incremental validity and treatment sensitivity. Still, further research is needed to validate these measures (e.g., discriminant validity) in order to justify their use across settings and study designs. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect