تحلیل روان‌سنجی نسخة کوتاه سیاهة غربالگری رفتارهای خودآسیب‌زنی در نوجوانان تیزهوش

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری روان‌شناسی تربیتی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، گروه روانشناسی، واحد تهران شمال، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.

2 استادیار گروه روان‌شناسی کاربردی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

3 دانشیار گروه آموزشی مطالعات زنان و خانواده، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی و اقتصاد، دانشگاه الزهرا (س)، تهران. ایران.

4 مرکز تحقیقات علوم رفتاری، پژوهشکده سبک زندگی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی بقیه (عج)، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

مقدمه و هدف: خودآسیب‌رسانی تعمدی بیانگر تخریب عمدی بافتِ سالم بدن، بدون قصد خودکشی است. با توجه به افزایش فزایندة نرخ رفتارهای خودآسیب‌زای غیرمنتهی به خودکشی در میان نوجوانان، تحلیل نظام‌دارِ عوامل خطر و مراقبتی معطوف بر چنین رفتارهایی، نیازمند دسترسی به ابزارهایی است که از مشخصه‌های فنی روایی و پایایی برخوردار باشند. بر این اساس، مطالعه حاضر با هدف تحلیل ویژگی‌های روان‌سنجی نسخة کوتاه سیاهة غربالگری خودآسیب‌زنی برای نوجوانان انجام شد.
روش: در این مطالعه پیمایشی، 300 نوجوان تیزهوش شهر کاشان که با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری در دسترس انتخاب شدند، به نسخة کوتاه سیاهة غربالگری خودآسیب‌زنی برای نوجوانان (کیم و همکاران، 2022)، مقیاس افسردگی، اضطراب و تنیدگی (لوی‌باند و لوی‌باند، 1995) و مقیاس رضایت از زندگی (دینر، ایمونس، لارسن و گریفین، 1985)، پاسخ دادند.
یافته‌ها: نتایج روش آماری تحلیل عاملی تأییدی از ساختار تک‌عاملی مفروض نسخة کوتاه سیاهة غربالگری خودآسیب‌زنی برای نوجوانان، حمایت کرد. مدل اندازه‌گیری تک‌عاملی، برازش مطلوبی با داده‌ها نشان داد. همچنین نسخة کوتاه سیاهة غربالگری خودآسیب‌زنی برای نوجوانان، از همسانی درونی خوبی برخوردار بود (89/0=α). علاوه بر این، همبستگی مثبت و معنادار خودآسیب‌زنی با مقیاس‌های اضطراب (31/0)، افسردگی (36/0) و استرس (34/0) و همبستگی منفی و معنادار خودآسیب‌زنی با رضامندی از زندگی (29/0-)، شواهد قابل دفاعی را در حمایت از روایی ملاکی نسخة کوتاه سیاهة غربالگری خودآسیب‌زنی برای نوجوانان فراهم آورد.
نتیجه‌گیری: در مجموع نتایج نشان داد که نسخه کوتاه سیاهة غربالگری خودآسیب‌زنی برای نوجوانان برای غربالگری رفتارهای خودآسیب‌زا در میان نوجوانان، از روایی و پایایی برخوردار است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Psychometric Analysis of the Short Version of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory for Gifted Adolescents

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maryam Valimohammadi 1
  • Omid Shokri 2
  • Mehrangiz Shoaa kazemi 3
  • Mohsen Ahmadi Tahour Soltani 4
1 Ph.D Student in Educational Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran.
2 Department of Appllied Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor,Department of Women’s and Family Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences and Economics, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
4 Behavioral Sciences Research Center, Life Style Institute, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Deliberate Self-Harm (DSH) is the intentional destruction of healthy body tissue without the intent to commit suicide. Given the rapidly increasing prevalence of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) among adolescents, it is essential to conduct a systematic analysis of the risk and protective factors associated with these behaviors using tools that demonstrate validity and reliability. Therefore, the current study was conducted to analyze the psychometric properties of the abbreviated version of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory for adolescents.
Method: In this survey study, 300 gifted adolescents were selected using the convenience sampling method. They completed the short version of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory for Adolescents (Kim et al., 2022), the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), and the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985).
Results: A confirmatory factor analysis supported the hypothesized one-factor structure. The one-factor model had a good fit. The SHSI also demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.89). Additionally, the Subjective Happiness Scale Inventory (SHSI) was positively correlated with the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale, and negatively correlated with the Satisfaction with Life Scale. These correlations support the criterion validity of the abbreviated version of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory for adolescents.
Discussion and Conclusion: The findings suggest that the SHSI is a reliable and valid tool for screening self-harm behaviors among adolescents.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Deliberate Self-Harm Behaviors
  • Adolescents
  • Psychometric Properties
  • Gifted

مراجع

  1.  

     

    1. Lefgren LJ, Stoddard OB, Stovall JE. Rationalizing self-defeating behaviors: theory and evidence. Journal of health economics, 2021; 76: 102407.
    2. 2. Randall JR, Rowe BH, Colman I. Emergency department assessment of self-harm risk using psychometric questionnaires. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 2012;57(1): 21-28.
    3. 3. Messer JM, Fremouw WJ. A critical review of explanatory models for self-mutilating behaviors in adolescents. Clinical psychology review, 2008; 28 (1): 162-178.
    4. 4. Pilkington P, Younan R, Bishop Early maladaptive schemas, suicidal ideation, and self-harm: A meta-analytic review. Journal of affective disorders reports, 2021; 3, 100051.
    5. 5. Muehlenkamp JJ. Self‐injurious behavior as a separate clinical syndrome. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 2005; 75 (2), 324-333.
    6. 6. De Leo D, Heller TS. Who are the kids who self‐harm? An Australian self‐report school survey. Medical journal of Australia, 2004; 181 (3), 140-144.
    7. 7. Lunde LG, Karim J, Quilisch E. Deliberate self‐harm in 15‐year‐old adolescents: A pilot study with a modified version of the Deliberate Self‐Harm Inventory. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 2007; 48 (1), 33-41.
    8. 8. Gratz KL, Conrad SD, Roemer L. Risk factors for deliberate self‐harm among college students. American journal of Orthopsychiatry, 2002; 72 (1), 128-140.
    9. 9. Andover MS, Pepper CM, Gibb BE. Self‐mutilation and coping strategies in a college sample. Suicide and Life‐Threatening Behavior, 2007; 37 (2), 238-243.
    10. 10. Baetens I, Claes L, Muehlenkamp J, Grietens H, Onghena P. Non-suicidal and suicidal self-injurious behavior among Flemish adolescents: A web-survey. Archives of Suicide Research, 2011; 15 (1), 56-67.
    11. 11. Claes L, Vandereycken W, Vertommen H. Clinical assessment of self-injurious behaviors: an overview of rating scales and self-reporting questionnaires. 2005; 2: 183-209.
    12. 12. Prinstein MJ. Introduction to the special section on suicide and nonsuicidal self-injury: a review of unique challenges and important directions for self-injury science. Journal of consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2008; 76 (1): 1-8.
    13. 13. Sourander A, Aromaa M, Pihlakoski L, Haavisto A, Rautava P, Helenius H, et al. Early predictors of deliberate self-harm among adolescents. A prospective follow-up study from age 3 to age 15. Journal of affective disorders, 2006; 93 (1), 87-96.
    14. 14. Gonzalez-Forteza C, Alvarez-Ruiz M, Saldana-Hernandez A, Carreno-Garcia S, Chavez-Hernandez A-M, Perez-Hernandez R. Prevalence of deliberate self-harm in teenage students in the state of Guanajuato, Mexico: 2003. Social behavior and Personality: an international journal, 2005; 33 (8), 777-792.
    15. 15. Gutierrez PM, Osman A, Barrios FX, Kopper BA. Development and initial validation of the Self-Harm Behavior Questionnaire. Journal of personality assessment, 2001; 77 (3), 475-490.
    16. 16. Linehan MM, Comtois KA, Brown MZ, Heard HL, Wagner A. Suicide Attempt Self-Injury Interview (SASII): development, reliability, and validity of a scale to assess suicide attempts and intentional self-injury. Psychological assessment, 2006; 18 (3), 303-312.
    17. 17. Kerfoot M. Deliberate self‐poisoning in childhood and early adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 1988; 29 (3), 335-343.
    18. 18. Nock MK, Holmberg EB, Photos VI, Michel BD. Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors Interview: development, reliability, and validity in an adolescent Psychological Assessment. 2007; 19 (3): 309-317.
    19. 19. Gratz KL. Measurement of deliberate self-harm: Preliminary data on the Deliberate Self-Harm Inventory. Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment. 2001; 23 (4): 253-263.
    20. 20. Latimer S, Covic T, Cumming SR, Tennant A. Psychometric analysis of the Self-Harm Inventory using Rasch modelling. BMC psychiatry. 2009; 9 (53), 1-9.
    21. 21. Kim S, Seo DG, Park J-C, Son Y, Lee J-H, Yoon D, et al. Development and validation of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory (SHSI) for adolescents. PLoS one. 2022; 17 (2), 0262723.
    22. 22. Whitlock J, Muehlenkamp J, Eckenrode J. Variation in nonsuicidal self-injury: Identification and features of latent classes in a college population of emerging adults. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology. 2008; 37 (4), 11-20.
    23. 23. Höller I, Teismann T, Cwik JC, Glaesmer H, Spangenberg L, Hallensleben N, et al. Short defeat and entrapment scale: A psychometric investigation in three German samples. Comprehensive Psychiatry. 2020; 98, 152160.
    24. 24. Lloyd E, Kelley M, Hope T, editors. Self-mutilation in a community sample of adolescents: Descriptive characteristics and provisional prevalence 1997: Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Behavioral Medicine, New Orleans, LA.
    25. 25. Klonsky ED, Glenn CR. Assessing the functions of non-suicidal self-injury: Psychometric properties of the Inventory of Statements About Self-injury (ISAS). Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment. 2009; 31 (3), 215-219.
    26. 26. Koh C. Diversifying the experiences of gifted and talented learners: A review of recent Trends and practices. C. Koh (ed.), Diversifying Learner Experience, (pp. 99-117). Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
    27. 27. Burns EC, Martin AJ. Motivational issues in gifted education: understanding the role of students’attribution and control beliefs, self-worth protection and growth orientation. S. R. Smith (ed.), Handbook of giftedness and talent development in the Asia-Pacific, (pp. 339-353). Springer International Handbooks of Education.
    28. 28. Grugan MC, Hill AP, Madigan DJ, Donachie TC, Olsson LF, Etherson ME. Perfectionism in academically gifted students: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review. 2021; 7: 1-43.
    29. 29. Meyers LS, Gamst G, Guarino AJ. Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation: Sage publications; 2016.
    30. 30. Lovibond SH, Lovibond PF. Manual for the depression anxiety stress scales: Psychology Foundation of Australia; 1995.
    31. 31. Shokri O, Shahidi S, Mazaheri M, Fathabadi J, Rahiminejad SP, Khanjani M. Evaluating the effectiveness of an immunization intervention program for undergraduates against negative emotional experiences based on the Pennsylvania preventive model. Educational Measurement and Evaluation Studies. 2014; 4 (7): 165-190.
    32. 32. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of personality assessment. 1985, 49 (1): 71-75.
    33. 33. Ogurlu U. Are gifted students perfectionistic? Meta-analysis. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 2020; 43 (3): 227-251.
    34. 34. Tan LS, Chun KYN. Perfectionism and academic emotions of gifted adolescent girls. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 2014; 23 (3): 389-401.
    35. 35. O'Connor RC, Williams JMG. The relationship between positive future thinking, brooding, defeat and entrapment. Personality and Individual Differences. 2014; 70: 29-34.
    36. 36. Hyatt LA, Cross TL. Understanding suicidal behavior of gifted students: Theory, factors, and cultural expectations. International handbook on giftedness: Springer; 2009; Science+Business Media B.V.
    37. 37. Rinn AN, Majority KL. The social and emotional world of the gifted. Handbook of giftedness in children: (pp. 49-63), Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature.
    38. 38. Mofield E, Parker Peters M. Understanding underachievement: Mindset, perfectionism, and achievement attitudes among gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 2019; 42 (2): 107-134.
    39. 39. Zelenski JM, Desrochers JE. Can positive and self-transcendent emotions promote pro-environmental behavior? Current Opinion in Psychology. 2021; 42: 31-35.
    40. 40. McIntyre R, Smith P, Rimes KA. The role of self-criticism in common mental health difficulties in students: A systematic review of prospective studies. Mental Health & Prevention. 2018; 10: 13-27.
    41. 41. Mushquash AR, Sherry SB. Understanding the socially prescribed perfectionist’s cycle of self-defeat: A 7-day, 14-occasion daily diary study. Journal of Research in Personality. 2012; 46: 700-709.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار