中文接纳与行动问卷第二版(AAQ-II)与认知融合问卷(CFQ)在回族和哈萨克族青少年中的信效度检验

Reliability and Validity in the Chinese Version of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-2nd Edition (AAQ-II) and the Chinese Version of Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) in Hui and Kazak Adolescents

摘要: 目的：检验中文版接纳与行动问卷第二版(AAQ-II)与认知融合问卷(CFQ)中文版在哈萨克族(以下简称“哈族”)高中生群体和回族大学生群体中的信效度，为研究经验性回避以及认知融合提供可靠有效的测量工具。方法：采用方便抽样选取哈族高中生群体和回族大学生群体两个样本共482位被试(n₁ = 248, n₂ = 234)施测AAQ-II、CFQ，并进行项目分析、内部一致性检验和验证性因素分析，同时施测自评抑郁量表(SDS)、自评焦虑量表(SAS)以检验校标关联效度。结果：AAQ-II量表在两个样本中的 Cronbach α系数分别为0.845、0.860；CFQ量表在两个样本中的Cronbach α系数分别为0.892、0.902；验证性因素分析显示两个量表的单因素模型拟合良好。校标效度检验显示，AAQ-II得分与SDS得分呈显著正相关(r₁ = 0.424, r₂ = 0.409, P < 0.01)，与SAS得分呈显著正相关(r₁ = 0.436, r₂ = 0.474, P < 0.01)；CFQ得分与SDS得分呈显著正相关(r₁ = 0.459, r₂ = 0.334, P < 0.01) ，与SAS得分呈显著正相关(r₁ = 0.393, r₂ = 0.442, P < 0.01)。结论：AAQ-II、CFQ中文版在哈族高中生群体和回族大学生群体中具有较好的信效度，可在我国用于相关研究。

Abstract: Objective: To examine the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-2nd Edition (AAQ-II) and the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) and to offer a measurement tool in studies of experiential avoidance and cognitive fusion. Methods: By conven-ience sampling method, two samples of Kazakh high school students (n₁ = 248) and Hui college students (n₂ = 234) were selected and assessed with the AAQ-II and CFQ for item analysis, internal consistency analysis and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) and Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) were administered to test the criterion-related validity. Results: The confirmatory factor analysis verified the one-factor model of AAQ-II and CFQ. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the two scales for the two samples was 0.845 and 0.860 (AAQ-II), 0.892 and 0.902 (CFQ), respectively. Concurrent validity results showed that AAQ-II was positively correlated with total scores of SDS (r₁ = 0.424, r₂ = 0.409, P < 0.01) and SAS (r₁ = 0.436, r₂ = 0.474, P < 0.01); CFQ was also positively correlated with total scores of SDS (r₁ = 0.459, r₂ = 0.334, P < 0.01) and SAS (r₁ = 0.393, r₂ = 0.442, P < 0.01). Conclusion: It suggests that the Chinese version of AAQ-II and CFQ are reliable and valid assessment for experiential avoidance and cognitive fusion in minority groups.