状态-特质愤怒表达量表修订版在大学生中的信效度  

Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2 in college students

作　　者：刘惠军[1] 高红梅[2] 

机构地区：[1]天津医科大学医学人文学院 [2]北京师范大学心理学院

出　　处：《中国心理卫生杂志》2012年第1期70-76,共7页Chinese Mental Health Journal

摘　　要：目的:引进状态-特质愤怒表达量表修订版(STAXI-2)并检验信效度。方法:通过翻译、回译形成STAXI-2中文版。采用方便取样方法抽取782名大学生,施测STAXI-2中文版,并以愤怒失控量表(ANG)和状态-特质焦虑量表(STAI)为校标。间隔3周,选取30人进行重测。结果:STAXI-2中文版共57个条目,分为状态愤怒(SAS)、特质愤怒(TAS)和愤怒表达(AX)3个分量表。SAS、TAS的内部一致性Cronbachα均>0.8,重测信度分别为0.18和0.83,验证性因素分析的拟合指数GFI、AG-FI、NFI、CFI和IFI均在0.88～0.96之间,RM SEA分别为0.09和0.08。AX的控制内部表达和外部表达因子的α均>0.8,重测信度均>0.6;AX的愤怒内部表达和外部表达因子的α在0.60～0.70之间;AX的拟合指数GFI、AGFI、NFI、CFI和IFI均在0.84～0.90之间,RMSEA为0.06。TAS得分与SAS得分及AX的愤怒内部表达和外部表达分均呈正相关(r=0.36、0.13、0.53),而与AX的控制内部表达和外部表达分负相关(r=-0.47、-0.52);SAS得分与AX的愤怒内部表达和外部表达分正相关(r=0.14、0.30),而与AX的控制内部表达和外部表达因子分负相关(r=-0.26和-0.21),均P<0.05。男性的TAS、SAS及AX的愤怒外部表达分均高于女性(均P<0.05)。结论:状态-特质愤怒表达量表修订版中的状态愤怒和特质愤怒分量表在中国大学生中具有较好的信效度;愤怒表达分量表的结构效度可以接受,但内部表达和外部表达两因子的信度偏低。Objective： To assess the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2（STAXI-2）in college students. Methods： A Chinese version of the STAXI-2 with 57 items was derived from the original English version. Totally 782 college students completed the STAXI-2, Anger Scale （ANG）, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory （STAI）. Thirty subjects were retested 3 weeks later. Internal consistency, test-retest stability, structure validity and criterion validity were tested. Results： The Chinese version of STAXI- 2 consisted of 57 items and three subscales, including state anger subscale （SAS）, trait anger subscale （TAS） and anger expression subscale （AX）. The Cronbach a of internal consistency reliability were good （ot 〉 0. 8） for SAS and TAS. The test-retest reliability for SAS and TAS were 0. 18 and 0. 83 respectively. The structure validity with CFA presented nice goodness of fit indices for SAS and TAS （ the GFI, AGFI, NFI, CFI and IFI were 0. 88 - 0.96, and the RMSEA were 0. 09 and 0. 08 respectively）. Regarding the AX, internal consistency coefficients for both factors of anger control were good （a 〉 0. 8）, for anger-in and anger-out were still questionable （0.6 〈 a 〈 0. 7）. CFA for anger expression scale with four dimensions showed good fit indices （ the GFI, AGFI, NFI, CFI and IFI were 0. 84 - 0. 90, and the RMSEA was 0.06）. The TAS scores were positively correlated with the scores of SAS and AX ＂anger-in＂ and ＂anger-out＂ （r =0. 36, 0. 13, and 0. 53）, and negatively correlated with the scores of AX ＂anger control-in＂ and ＂anger control-out＂ （ r = - 0. 47, - 0. 52）. The SAS scores were positively correlated with the scores of AX ＂anger-in＂ and ＂anger-out＂ （ r = 0. 14, 0. 30）, and negatively correlated with the scores of AX ＂anger control-in＂ and ＂anger control-out＂ （r = - 0.26, - 0.21）. Males had higher scores of TAS, SAS and AX ＂angerout＂ than females （Ps 〈0. 05）.

关 键 词：愤怒 状态-特质愤怒表达量表修订版 信度 效度 

分 类 号：B842.6[哲学宗教—基础心理学]