查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 中文版睡眠失功能信念及態度量表之信、效度探討=Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitudes about Sleep (DBAS): Validation of the Chinese Version |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳昌偉; 詹雅雯; 楊建銘; 林詩淳; | 書刊名 | 臨床心理學刊 |
卷期 | 4:1 2009.06[民98.06] |
頁次 | 頁59-67 |
分類號 | 415.939 |
關鍵詞 | 睡眠失功能信念及態度量表; 失眠; 信度; 效度; Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitudes about Sleep; Insomnia; Reliability; Validity; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 目的:睡眠相關的認知與信念在失眠的病因與治療上扮演極為重要的角色。本研究目的為探討繁式(DBAS)與簡式(DBAS-16)中文版睡眠失功能信念及態度量表之信、效度,以提供國內研究者及臨床工作者使用參考。方法:194位正常睡眠者與273位失眠患者均填寫一份自陳式問卷題本,其中包含基本資料、睡眠失功能信念及態度量表及匹茲堡睡眠品質量表等,將資料收集後計算DBAS與DBAS-16之信、效度,並比較正常睡眠者與失眠患者在得分上的差異。此外,在失眠組當中有84人接受失眠認知行為治療,且在治療結束後再次填寫問卷題本,探討量表是否能反應出治療前後認知改變的差異。結果:DBAS及DBAS-16全量表皆具有良好的內部一致性信度,然而,在分量表的信度上,DBAS五個分量表中,有兩個分量表之內部一致性信度不佳,反之,DBAS-16四個分量表皆具有可接受的內部一致性信度。由驗證型因素分析結果,顯示DBAS的五因素結構只有部分得到支持,相較之下DBAS-16的四因素結構具有較佳的適配性。而在區辨失眠組與正常睡眠者的鑑別度上,DBAS與DBAS-16皆可顯著地區辨兩組受試者(除DBAS分量表三及DBAS-16分量表三外),而在接受失眠認知行為治療後,失眠組患者在DBAS與DBAS-16的後測分數皆顯著低於前測。最後,在效標關連效度上,DBAS及DBAS-16與匹茲堡睡眠品質量表的相關達統計顯著。結論:DBAS與DBAS-16具有良好的信、效度,然而,DBAS五個分量表間的內部一致性差異頗大,且在因素結構上,DBAS-16之適切性優於DBAS。因此,本研究結果顯示DBAS-16不但可反應失眠患者對於睡眠相關的信念,且在各測量指標上皆具有良好的特性,因此,中文版DBAS-16在臨床及研究使用上是一份具有價值的量表。 |
英文摘要 | Objective: Sleep related beliefs and cognitions play an important role in the etiology and treatment of insomnia. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitudes about Sleep (DBAS) and a 16-item abbreviated version of the DBAS (DBAS-16).Methods: A total of 194 good sleepers and 273 insomnia sufferers completed the DBAS and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). The internal consistency, factor structure and the of the instrument, were evaluated.Results: The results showed that both the DBAS and the DBAS-16 had adequate internal consistency, and could effectively discriminate good sleepers from insomnia sufferers and reflect the changes in sleep belief resulted from Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insmnia. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the four factors in the original DBAS-16. Finally, the total scores of both the DBAS and the DBAS-16 significantly correlated with PSQI.Conclusions: The DBAS and DBAS-16 showed adequate reliability and validity; however, DBAS-16 had better fitness in factor structure compared to the DBAS. The results suggested that the DBAS-16 would be relatively better to be used in studies and clinical settings compared to the DBAS. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。