Zobrazení zdroje stránky Holderholmberg3833

The current study replicates and extends previous research and provides the strongest psychometric evidence to date of teacher-rated SCT using the CABI. The teacher-report CABI may be especially useful in the school-based screening of SCT and ADHD-IN. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).The Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD) is a 9-item self-report screening instrument and was developed to assess personality disorder (PD) severity according to the initial proposal of ICD-11. Our aim was to investigate the psychometric properties of the German version of the SASPD in nonclinical and clinical samples. A total of 1,991 participants (N = 888 from nonclinical and N = 1,103 from clinical samples) provided ratings on the SASPD as well as other measures of psychopathology and personality. We examined the SASPD regarding its factor structure, internal consistency, and construct validity. A unidimensional structure of the SASPD provided inadequate model fit, whereas a 3-factor solution provided good fit in both the nonclinical and clinical samples. Internal consistency of the SASPD total score was acceptable in the clinical and nonclinical samples based on this multifactorial model. [https://www.selleckchem.com/products/JNJ-7706621.html JNJ-7706621] In terms of convergent validity, SASPD scores correlated fairly with other measures of PD severity across samples. Discriminant validity with measures of general symptom distress and measures of (normal) personality traits was mixed. In addition, the SASPD scores predicted levels of PD severity above and beyond a measure of symptom distress. The SASPD captures some theoretically expected features of PD severity. However, the multidimensional structure and limited convergent and discriminant validity may hamper future usage of the SASPD as a short screening tool of PD severity according to ICD-11. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).Emerging evidence shows that the construct validity of commonly used chronic stress measures is questionable. Item response theory was used to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Perceived Stress Questionnaire (PSQ), the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), and the Screening Scale of Chronic Stress (SSCS). Using multidimensional item response modeling of data from two population-based samples (N₁ = 5,379, N₂ = 504), we identified and conceptually replicated a five-dimensional model combining items of chronic stress, neuroticism (i.e., Big Five Inventory Neuroticism scale; BFI-N), and depressiveness (i.e., Patient Health Questionnaire depressiveness scale; PHQ-9). The findings suggested a major overlap of variance between items of the applied instruments forming a pronounced common latent scale, which appeared to be mainly based on the perceived extent of freely available energy (i.e., vitality vs. fatigue). Accordingly, the overlap between items of the PSQ, PSS, and SSCS was larger with PHQ-9 items than BFI-N items. Specifically, items of chronic stress seem to discriminate subclinical manifestations of fatigue, a core symptom of depressiveness. Subsequently estimated person parameters were used to predict hair cortisol concentrations (HCC), a physiological indicator of chronic stress. Controlling for potential confounders, only the common latent scale showed a weak association with HCC, whereas residual variance components were not predictive of HCC. This finding further supports the notion that instruments like PSQ, PSS, and SSCS show an impaired construct validity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).During mind wandering, visual processing of external information is attenuated. Accordingly, mind wandering is associated with changes in gaze behaviors, albeit findings are inconsistent in the literature. This heterogeneity obfuscates a complete view of the moment-to-moment processing priorities of the visual system during mind wandering. We hypothesize that this observed heterogeneity is an effect of idiosyncrasy across tasks with varying spatial allocation demands, visual processing demands, and discourse processing demands and reflects a strategic, compensatory shift in how the visual system operates during mind wandering. We recorded eye movements and mind wandering (via thought-probes) as 132 college-aged adults completed a battery of 7 short (6 min) tasks with different visual demands. We found that for tasks requiring extensive sampling of the visual field, there were fewer fixations, and, depending on the specific task, fixations were longer and/or more dispersed. This suggests that visual sampling is sparser and potentially slower and more dispersed to compensate for the decreased sampling rate during mind wandering. For tasks that demand centrally focused gaze, mind wandering was accompanied by more exploratory eye movements, such as shorter and more dispersed fixations as well as larger saccades. Gaze behaviors were not reliably associated with mind wandering during a film comprehension task. These findings provide insight into how the visual system prioritizes external information when attention is focused inward and indicates the importance of task demands when assessing the relationship between eye movements, visual processing, and mind wandering. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).Synchronizing movements with events in the surrounding environment is a ubiquitous aspect of behavior. Experiments studying multimodal integration and rhythmic synchronization tend to focus on how bimodal (e.g., audio-visual) stimuli enhances synchronization performance (i.e., reduced variability) compared with synchronization with its unimodal constituents. As such, it is unclear whether trimodal (i.e., audio-visual-tactile) stimuli may yield additional performance benefits. To address this, we developed a multimodal sensorimotor synchronization assessment that incorporates audio, visual, and vibrotactile stimuli. Results replicate performance improvements with bimodal compared with unimodal stimuli. However, trimodal stimuli yields less, or in some cases no advantage compared with bimodal stimuli. These results demonstrate that in this case, increasing the amount of sensory information beyond bimodal stimuli yields little or no additional performance benefits. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).