首页> 外文期刊>JMIR Mental Health >Assessment of Microstressors in Adults: Questionnaire Development and Ecological Validation of the Mainz Inventory of Microstressors
【24h】

Assessment of Microstressors in Adults: Questionnaire Development and Ecological Validation of the Mainz Inventory of Microstressors

机译:评估成人微观传感器:调查问卷发展和微核仪式库存的生态验证

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Many existing scales for microstressor assessment do not differentiate between objective (ie, observable) stressor events and stressful cognitions or concerns. They often mix items assessing objective stressor events with items measuring other aspects of stress, such as perceived stressor severity, the evoked stress reaction, or further consequences on health, which may result in spurious associations in studies that include other questionnaires that measure such constructs. Most scales were developed several decades ago; therefore, modern life stressors may not be represented. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) allows for sampling of current behaviors and experiences in real time and in the natural habitat, thereby maximizing the generalization of the findings to real-life situations (ie, ecological validity) and minimizing recall bias. However, it has not been used for the validation of microstressor questionnaires so far. Objective The aim is to develop a questionnaire that (1) allows for retrospective assessment of microstressors over one week, (2) focuses on objective (ie, observable) microstressors, (3) includes stressors of modern life, and (4) separates stressor occurrence from perceived stressor severity. Methods Cross-sectional (N=108) and longitudinal studies (N=10 and N=70) were conducted to evaluate the Mainz Inventory of Microstressors (MIMIS). In the longitudinal studies, EMA was used to compare stressor data, which was collected five times per day for 7 or 30 days with retrospective reports (end-of-day, end-of-week). Pearson correlations and multilevel modeling were used in the analyses. Results High correlations were found between end-of-week, end-of-day, and EMA data for microstressor occurrence (counts) ( r ≥.69 for comparisons per week, r ≥.83 for cumulated data) and for mean perceived microstressor severity ( r ≥.74 for comparisons per week, r ≥.85 for cumulated data). The end-of-week questionnaire predicted the EMA assessments sufficiently (counts: beta=.03, 95% CI .02-.03, P .001; severity: beta=.73, 95% CI .59-.88, P .001) and the association did not change significantly over four subsequent weeks. Conclusions Our results provide evidence for the ecological validity of the MIMIS questionnaire.
机译:背景技术许多用于微型技术评估的现有尺度不会区分目标(即,可观察)的压力源事件和压力认知或疑虑之间。它们经常混合评估物品压力源事件的物品,这些物品测量应力的其他方面,例如感知的压力源严重程度,诱发的压力反应或对健康的进一步后果,这可能导致研究中的虚假协会,其中包括测量此类构建体的其他问卷。大多数尺度是几十年前发展的;因此,现代生活压力源不得代表。生态瞬间评估(EMA)允许实时和实时和在自然栖息地中进行当前行为和经验,从而最大化对现实生活中的结果(即生态有效性)和最小化召回偏差的概括。但是,到目前为止,它还没有用于验证微带师问卷。目标是开发一个调查问卷,(1)允许在一周内对微观传感器的回顾性评估,(2)侧重于目标(即可观察的)微缩师,(3)包括现代生活的压力,(4)分离压力源感知压力源严重程度发生。方法进行横截面(n = 108)和纵向研究(n = 10和n = 70),以评估微段(MIMIS)的主避库存。在纵向研究中,EMA用于比较压力数据,其每天收集5次,7或30天,回顾性报告(日期,周末)。在分析中使用Pearson相关和多级模型。结果在周末,日期和EMA数据之间发现了高相关性,用于微观运动员发生(计数)(R≥.69,每周比较,累积数据的r≥.83)和用于平均感知的微纹理严重程度(R≥.74,每周比较,累积数据的r≥.85)。终年问卷预测EMA评估(计数:β= .03,95%CI .02-.03,P <.001;严重程度:BETA = .73,95%CI .59-.88, P <.001)和关联在随后的四周内没有显着变化。结论我们的结果为MIMIS问卷的生态有效性提供了证据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号