Tuesday, September 17, 2019

Impulsiveness - Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Brief (BIS)




An 8-item version of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale is available. The 30-item BIS is a commonly used measure of impulsiveness. The original scale has undergone a number of revisions. In 2013, Lynne Steinberg and her team evaluated an 11-item version.  Based on the evidence, an 8-item version was developed. The 8-item version is knows as BIS-Brief

Each item is rated on a 4-point scale as follows.

1 = rarely/never
2 = occasionally
3 = often
4 = almost always/always

Items

The items ask the participants about thinking, planning, and self-control.

The items  may be used for education and research. purposes. The PsycTESTS entry included the following permissions statement.
Test content may be reproduced and used for non-commercial research and educational purposes without seeking written permission. Distribution must be controlled, meaning only to the participants engaged in the research or enrolled in the educational activity. Any other type of reproduction or distribution of test content is not authorized without written permission from the author and publisher. Always include a credit line that contains the source citation and copyright owner when writing about or using any test.
The 8-item list is in PsycTESTS:

Steinberg, L., Sharp, C., Stanford, M. S., & Tharp, A. T. (2013). Barratt Impulsiveness Scale–Brief [Database record]. Retrieved from PsycTESTS. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/t21455-000

Items are also included in Steinberg et al. (2013).

Reliability

Reliability findings reported by Steinberg et al. (2013) using IRT analysis was approximately .80 and Cronbach's alpha was .78.

advertisement

Learn more about test statistics in Applied Statistics: Concepts for Counselors available on AMAZON.com and in many other worldwide markets served by AMAZON.


Validity

Steinberg et al. (2013) reported evidence of construct validity based on three samples of participants in three age groups. They found similar correlations between the 8-item version and the full 30-item version. The article also includes correlations with other measures in clinical samples.

A more recent study supported the utility of the BIS-Brief in an adolescent sample. The authors noted two-dimensions of the scale (Charles, Floyd, & Barry, 2019). Link to Sage online publication.

References

Barratt, E. S. (1959). Anxiety and impulsiveness related to psychomotor efficiency. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 9, 191–198. doi:10.2466/pms.1959.9.3.191


Barratt, E. S. (1985). Impulsiveness subtraits: Arousal and information processing. In J. T. Spence & C. E. Izard (Eds.), Motivation, emotion, and personality (pp. 137–146). North Holland, the Netherlands: Elsevier.


Steinberg, L., Sharp, C., Stanford, M. S., & Tharp, A. T. (2013). New tricks for an old measure: The development of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale–Brief (BIS-Brief). Psychological Assessment, 25, 216-226. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030550

Steinberg, L., Sharp, C., Stanford, M. S., & Tharp, A. T. (2013). Barratt Impulsiveness Scale–Brief [Database record]. Retrieved from PsycTESTS. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/t21455-000

If you are working on a survey  project, you may also find Creating Surveys helpful. Available on AMAZON.


Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton


Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)


Saturday, September 14, 2019

Sacred Marriage Scales

Two scales examine couples' perspectives on the role of God in their marriages. The scales are the work of Mahoney, Pargament, and DeMaris (2009). Examples and a reference are included below.

The first scale looks at the role of God in their marriage. There are 10-items. Couples are advised that they substitute another word for God as may be applicable to their faith.

Revised Manifestation of God in Marriage

     Following are the instructions

Directions: Some of the following questions use the word "God." Different people use different terms for God, such as "Higher Power," "Divine Spirit," "Spiritual Force," "Holy Spirit," "Yahweh," "Allah,", "Buddha”, or “Goddess.” Please feel free to substitute your own word for God when answering any of the questions that follow. Also, some people do not believe in God. If this is the case for you, please feel free to choose the "strongly disagree" response when needed.
  Two sample items:
   
     1) God played a role in how I ended up being married to my spouse.


     2) I sense God’s presence in my relationship with my spouse.

Revised Sacred Qualities of Marriage

  Two sample items:

     1) My marriage is holy.


     2) Being with my spouse feels like a deeply spiritual experience.

Scoring
There are 10-items in the scales. Participants are asked to respond on a 1 to 7 scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 4 = neutral, and 7 = Strongly Disagree.

Availability

Here's the internet address for the scales:

https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/psychology/psy-spirit-fam-mahoney/Original_Revised_Sanctification_Scales.pdf

Reference

Mahoney, A., Pargament, K. I., & DeMaris, A. (2009). Couples viewing marriage and pregnancy
through the lens of the Sacred: A descriptive study. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 20, 1-45.

Learn more about Creating Surveys in the book, Creating Surveys on AMAZON.







Holy Sex Sanctification of Sexuality in Relationships


Two 10-item scales assess the degree to which couples view sexuality from a spiritual perspective.
The scales published by Hernandez, Mahoney, and Pargament (2011) are rated on the same 7-point scale.

The wording is clearly aimed at married couples. Although they use the word God, note that in a similar scale focused on children from some of the same authors, participants are instructed to think of their own deity.



Revised Manifestation of God in Marital Sexuality

Two sample items:

     1) God played a role in my decision to have a sexual relationship with my spouse. 

     2) Our sexual relationship speaks to the presence of God.

Revised Sacred Qualities of Marital Sexuality

Two sample items:

     1) Being sexually intimate with my spouse feels like a deeply spiritual experience.

     2) Our sexual relationship seems like a miracle to me.


Scoring

There are 10-items in the scale. Participants are asked to respond on a 1 to 7 scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 4 = neutral, and 7 = Strongly Disagree.

Availability

Link to the scales online

https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/psychology/psy-spirit-fam-mahoney/Original_Revised_Sanctification_Scales.pdf


Reference

Hernandez, K. M., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K. I. (2011). Sanctification of sexuality: Implications
for newlyweds' marital and sexual quality. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 775-780.


Learn more about Creating Surveys in the book, Creating Surveys on AMAZON.







Sanctification of Parenting Scale Revised

Mahoney, Pargament and deMaris (2009) published a revised scale that examines beliefs of  a mother toward her child.

The authors advise researchers that they may change the word "baby" to other child age labels depending on the age of the children in their study. Thus, researchers may use labels of "toddler," "child," or "teen" in place of "baby."

Spirituality

Although the authors use the word God, the instructions invite participants to use their own word for the deity. Following is a copy of the instructions. Notice the different term for the scale's name.


Revised Manifestation of God in Parenting:

Directions: Some of the following questions use the word "God." Different people use different terms for God, such as "Higher Power," "Divine Spirit," "Spiritual Force," "Holy Spirit," "Yahweh," "Allah,", "Buddha”, or “Goddess.” Please feel free to substitute your own word for God when answering any of the questions that follow. Also, some people do not believe in God. If this is the case for you, please feel free to choose the "strongly disagree" response when needed.
   Sample items
1) God played a role in my baby coming into my life.
 2) I sense God's presence in my relationship with my baby.
   Scoring

There are 10-items in the scale. Participants are asked to respond on a 1 to 7 scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 4 = neutral, and 7 = Strongly Disagree.


Advertisement
Learn more about integrating faith and parenting in Discipline with Respect: Christian Family Edition. No charge to read for those with Kindle Unlimited.  BUY ON AMAZON



Revised Sacred Qualities of Parenting

The authors include a second set of 10-items, rated on the same 7-point scale to assess the sacred qualities of parenting. Following are two examples of this scale.

     1) My baby seems like a miracle to me.

     2) Being a mother feels like a deeply spiritual experience.


Availability

You can find the full scale at this link:    https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/psychology/psy-spirit-fam-mahoney/Original_Revised_Sanctification_Scales.pdf

Reference

The full reference to the Mahoney et al. (2009) scale is below.

Mahoney, A., Pargament, K. I., & DeMaris, A. (2009). Couples viewing marriage and pregnancy
through the lens of the Sacred: A descriptive study. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 20, 1-45.

Learn more about Creating Surveys in the book, Creating Surveys on AMAZON.






Wednesday, August 28, 2019

Why Counselor's Tests Are Not Reliable





The reason counselor's tests are not reliable is that reliability is a property of scores not tests. This isn't a matter of semantics. Think about it this way.

Give all the students in one school an achievement test. The test items don't change so they appear stable, consistent, and reliable. However, when publishers report reliability values, they calculate the reliability statistics based on scores. Scores vary from one administration to another. If you ever took a test twice and got a different score, you know what I mean. Individuals change from day to day. And we change from year to year. Also, even a representative sample of students for a nation can be different each year.

Everytime we calculate a reliability statistic, the statistic is slightly different.

Reliability values vary with the sample.

Reliability values also vary with the method used for calculation. You can get high reliability values using coefficient alpha with scores from a one-time administration. This method is common in research articles. But you will see different values from the same research team in different samples in the same article.


If we use a split-half method, which usually calculates reliability based on a correlation between two halves of one test, then we can get a reliability value based on one administration. But that's only half a test! Researchers use the Spearman-Brown formula to correct for the shortened half-test problem- but that's just an estimate of what the full test could be.


There's also a test-retest reliability method. Give a test one time, wait awhile- maybe a week or several weeks, then retest. That gives you an estimate of stability. But if you have a good memory, you can score higher on the second test on some tests like intelligence and achievement.


By now you get the point. Any one test can be associated with a lot of reliability values. The problem is not necessarily with counselor tests. The problem can be misunderstanding that tests do not have one reliability value. As with many things in science, there are many variables to consider when answering a question.

Reputable test publishers include reliability values in their test manuals. Counselors, Psychologists, and other test users ought to know about test score reliability.

Learn more assessment and statistical concepts in

Applied Statistics: Concepts for Counselors

AMAZON BOOKS




Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton



Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)




Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Measuring Guilt and Shame with the GASP (Guilt and Shame Scale)





Taya Cohen of Carnegie Mellon University has made the Guilt and Shame Proneness Scale (GASP) available online. Here’s what Dr. Cohen said about the scale in 2011. I’ll include a link to the full scale below.

The Guilt and Shame Proneness scale (GASP) measures individual differences in the propensity to experience guilt and shame across a range of personal transgressions. The GASP contains four fouritem subscales: GuiltNegativeBehaviorEvaluation (GuiltNBE), GuiltRepair, ShameNegativeSelfEvaluation (ShameNSE), and ShameWithdraw.

Each item on the GASP is rated on a 7-point scale from 1 = very unlikely to 7 = very likely.

Here’s an example of an item from the GASP scale.

_____ 1. After realizing you have received too much change at a store, you decide to keep it because the salesclerk doesn't notice. What is the likelihood that you would feel uncomfortable about keeping the money?

Information about reliability, validity, and factor structure can be found in the 2011 reference below. The article reports the results of several studies. One interesting finding is the relationship of both shame and guilt to morality--they share some common features. People high in both guilt and shame are less likely to engage in unethical business behavior. 

Ad. Learn more about Creating Surveys -- Download a FREE sample.













There’s more to the discussion than I have stated here so, do see the entire article.

Finding the GASP scale

If the link no longer works, see the 2011 reference below.

Ad. Learn more about test statistics in counseling with Applied Statistics Read a FREE sample before you buy.


References

Cohen, T. R., Wolf, S. T., Panter, A. T., & Insko, C. A. (2011). Introducing the GASP scale: A new measure of guilt and shame proneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(5), 947966. doi: 10.1037/a0022641 Link: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-08412-001

Wolf, S. T., Cohen, T. R., Panter, A. T., & Insko, C. A. (2010). Shame proneness and guilt proneness: Toward the further understanding of reactions to public and private transgressions. Self & Identity, 9, 337362. doi: 10.1080/15298860903106843

You may also be interested in a related post about Test of Self-Conscious Affect (TOSCA).


Getting permission to use the GASP
APA is the copyright owner. Here is the link regarding copyright permission:

Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

LinkedIN Geoffrey Sutton  PhD



Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)


Measuring Shame and Self-Conscious Emotions TOSCA



Psychologists assess shame as one of a few measures of self-conscious emotions. In addition to shame, the list includes embarrassment, guilt, humiliation, and pride. As with many measures of person characteristics, there are measures of traits or dispositions and measures of states. 

State shame is a temporary emotion such as a state of shame following a specific act that has been made public. Trait shame is a durable condition, which means a person experiences shame for a period of time in multiple settings.

The classic measure of shame is the TOSCA (Test of Self-Conscious Affect. The TOSCA, developed by June P. Tangney, is now in its third edition and includes versions for adolescents (TOSCA-A) and children (TOSCA-C; Tangney & Dearing, 2002).

People taking the TOSCA read a scenario and provide a response. The responses reflect different ways to respond to a situation: shame-proneness, guilt-proneness, externalization, pride in one’s self (alpha pride), pride in one’s behavior (beta pride), and detachment.

The TOSCA scales are widely used. See the references in Watson, Gomez, and Gullone (2016) for a list of recent studies.

Ad. Learn more about test statistics in counseling with Applied Statistics Read a FREE sample before you buy.



If you would like copies of various measures, contact the psychology lab linked to Professor Tangney’s page at George Mason University. There is a list of scales and an email address. http://mason.gmu.edu/~jtangney/measures.html

Learn more about shame in this interview with June Tangney: https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/interviews/4317264-tangney

References

Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. (2002). Shame and guilt. New York: Guilford Press.

Watson, S. D., Gomez, R., & Gullone, E. (2016). The Shame and Guilt Scales of the Test of Self-Conscious Affect-Adolescent (TOSCA-A): Psychometric Properties for Responses from Children, and Measurement Invariance Across Children and Adolescents. Frontiers in psychology7, 635. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00635

You might also be interested in the Guilt and Shame Scale (GASP)

Ad. Learn more about Creating Surveys -- Download a FREE sample.



Watch Dr. Tangney on YouTube




Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

LinkedIN Geoffrey Sutton  PhD



Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)


Impulsiveness - Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Brief (BIS)

An 8-item version of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale is available. The 30-item BIS is a commonly used measure of impulsiveness. The orig...