特质性预期加工问卷的汉化及信效度检验

Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the Trait Anticipatory Processing Questionnaire

摘要: 目的：汉化特质性预期加工问卷，并检验其在中国青年人群中的信度和效度。方法：对问卷进行翻译、修订与回译，形成最终中文版。共回收问卷291份，筛选后获得有效问卷276份，样本年龄18~29岁，平均年龄(22.25 ± 2.27)岁。采用Liebowitz社交焦虑量表、反刍思维量表、事后加工特质量表、患者健康问卷抑郁量表和一般自我效能感量表作为效标工具。间隔4周后，130名被试完成重测。结果：单因子结构获得一定支持，但部分CFA拟合指标(如RMSEA)未达到理想标准；APQ-T得分与LSAS、RRS、PEPI-T、PHQ-9得分均呈正相关，与GSES得分呈负相关(|r| = 0.42~0.79，均p < .001)。APQ-T的Cronbach α系数为0.96，重测信度为0.82。结论：APQ-T中文版在本研究样本中表现出较好的内部一致性和效标关联效度，可作为评估中国青年群体特质性预期加工的参考工具，但其结构效度和文化适应性仍需在更大且更具代表性的样本中进一步验证。

Abstract: Objective: To translate the Trait Version of the Anticipatory Processing Questionnaire (APQ-T) into Chinese and examine its reliability and validity among Chinese young adults. Methods: The questionnaire was translated, revised, and back-translated to produce the final Chinese version. A total of 291 questionnaires were collected, of which 276 valid responses were retained after screening. Participants were aged 18 to 29 years, with a mean age of 22.25 ± 2.27 years. The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, Ruminative Responses Scale, Post-Event Processing Inventory-Trait, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and General Self-Efficacy Scale were administered as criterion measures. After a 4-week interval, 130 participants completed the retest. Results: The one-factor structure received some support, but certain CFA fit indices (e.g., RMSEA) were not ideal. APQ-T scores were positively correlated with scores on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, Ruminative Responses Scale, Post-Event Processing Inventory-Trait, and Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and negatively correlated with scores on the General Self-Efficacy Scale (|r| = 0.42~0.79, all p < .001). The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the APQ-T was 0.96, and the test-retest reliability was 0.82. Conclusion: In this sample, the Chinese version of the APQ-T demonstrated good internal consistency and criterion-related validity and may serve as a reference tool for assessing trait anticipatory processing among Chinese young adults; however, its structural validity and cultural adaptability require further examination in larger and more diverse samples.