目的:验证社交技能评定目录(SSC)中文版在我国精神障碍患者社交技能评估中的信效度.方法:选择按美国精神障碍诊断和统计手册第4版(DSM-IV)诊断为精神分裂症、情感障碍及其他精神障碍的患者共200名(病例组)及正常对照30名(正常组),请3名精神科专业人员用SSC进行评估,并对其中30名患者同时评定世界卫生组织残疾评定量表-Ⅱ(WHO-DAS-Ⅱ)和自我意识量表的社交焦虑分量表(SAS).结果:SSC中文版的重测信度为0.93～0.99,评定者一致性0.92,内部一致性0.81～0.94;SSC中文版得分与WHO-DAS-Ⅱ和SAS得分呈正相关(r=0.37～0.72,P＜0.05),但区分效度有待进一步验证;探索性因素分析将SSC中文版聚合为3因子模型,验证性因素分析显示该模型结构大致合理(除近似均方根误差外).精神分裂症组SCC中文版各因子评分均高于对照组,情感障碍组的交谈和冲突处理能力评分高于对照组(P＜0.001).结论:社交技能评定目录用于我国18岁以上精神障碍患者的社交技能评估的信效度良好,但区分效度和结构效度有待进一步验证.%Objective: To test the reliability and validity of Social Skills Checklist (SSC) -Chinese version in patients with mental disorders. Methods: Totally 200 patients (schizophrenia or mood disorder or other psychiatric disorders) and 30 normal controls were recruited in this research. Their social functioning was assessed with the SSC by 3 psychiatrists. Thirty patients were also assessed with the WHO psychiatric Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO-DAS-II) and Social Anxiety Subscale of the Self-Consciousness Scale (SAS). Results:Test-retest reliability was 0. 93 ～0. 99, inter-rater consistency was 0. 92, and Cronbach＇α coefficients were 0. 81 ～ 0. 94. The SSc score was positively correlated with the WHO-DAS-I and SAS score (r= 0. 37 ～ 0. 72, P ＜ 0. 05), but discriminant validity needed further evaluation. The SSC were aggregated into 3 subscales by exploratory factor analysis. And this 3-subscale-model was proved reasonable by lisrel except the RMSEA. The patients scored higher in the SSC than the controls (P ＜ 0. 001). Conclusion: The Social Skills Checklist generally has adequate reliability and validity in assessment of social skills of Chinese patients with mental disorders except construct validity and discriminant validity.
展开▼
