Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The Thought Suppression Inventory (TSI; Rassin, European Journal of Personality 17: 285-298, 2003) was designed to measure thought intrusion, thought suppression and successful thought suppression. Given the importance to distinguish between these three aspects of thought control, the aim of this study was to scrutinize the dimensionality of the TSI. In a sample of 333 Dutch senior citizins, we examined (1) the dimensionality of the TSI using various procedures such as PAF, Mokken scale analysis (MSA) and CFA, and (2) the scale properties of the TSI. PAF favored a two factor solution, however, MSA and CFA suggested that three dimensions most adequately capture the structure of the TSI. Although all scales obtained at least medium scalability coefficients, several items were identified that are psychometrically unsound and may benefit from rewording or replacement. The findings suggest that the TSI is a three-dimensional questionnaire as originally proposed by Rassin (European Journal of Personality 17: 285-298, 2003) measuring thought intrusion, thought suppression, and successful thought suppression.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). Amos (Version 7.0) [Computer Program]. Chicago: SPSS.
Beauducel, A. (2001). Problems with parallel analysis in data sets with oblique simple structure. Methods of Psychological Research, 6, 141–157.
Blumberg, S. J. (2000). The White Bear Suppression Inventory: revising its factor structure. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 943–950. CrossRef
Brewin, C. R., & Beaton, A. (2002). Thought suppression, intelligence, and working memory capacity. Behavior Research and Therapy, 29, 943–950.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with Amos: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Clark, D. A., & Purdon, C. (1993). New perspectives for a cognitive theory of obsessions. Australian Psychologist, 28, 161–167. CrossRef
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10, 1–9.
Emons, W. H. M., Sijtsma, K., & Pedersen, S. S. (2010). Dimensionality of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in Cardiac Patients: Comparison of Mokken Scale Analysis and Factor Analysis. Assessment. Retrieved from http://asm.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/10/14/1073191110384951.full.pdf
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. CrossRef
Hemker, B. T., Sijtsma, K., & Molenaar, I. W. (1995). Selection of unidimensional scales from a multidimensional itembank in the polytomous Mokken IRT model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 337–352. CrossRef
Höping, W., & De Jong-Meyer, R. (2003). Differentiating unwanted intrusive thoughts from thought suppression: what does the White Bear Suppression Inventory measure? Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1049–1055. CrossRef
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. CrossRef
Lane, J. D., & Wegner, D. M. (1995). The cognitive consequences of secrecy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 237–253. CrossRef
Mokken, R. J., & Lewis, C. (1982). A nonparametric approach to the analysis of dichotomous item responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 417–430. CrossRef
Molenaar, I. W., & Sijtsma, K. (2000). User´s manual MSP5 for windows. Groningen: iecProGAMMA.
Najmi, S., & Wegner, D. M. (2009). Hidden complications of thought suppression. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 2, 210–223. CrossRef
O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396–402. CrossRef
Rassin, E. (2003). The White Bear Suppression Inventory (WBSI) focuses on failing suppression attempts. European Journal of Personality, 17, 285–298. CrossRef
Salkovkis, P. M., & Campbell, P. (1994). Thought suppression induces intrusion in naturally occurring negative intrusive thoughts. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 32, 1–8. CrossRef
Shipherd, J. C., & Salters-Pedneault, K. (2008). Attention, memory, intrusive thoughts, and acceptance in PTSD: an update on the empirical literature for clinicians. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 15, 349–363. CrossRef
Sijtsma, K., & Molenaar, I. W. (2002). Introduction to nonparametric item response theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Thornton, T. L., & Gilden, D. L. (2005). Provenance of correlations in psychological data. Psychonomic Bulleton & Review, 12, 409–441. CrossRef
Van der Linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.). (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York: Springer.
Wegner, D. M. (1992). You can´t always think what you want: Problems in the suppression of unwanted thoughts. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 193–225). New York: Academic.
Wegner, D. M., Schneider, D. J., Knutson, B., & McMahon, S. R. (1991). Polluting the stream of consciousness: the effect of thought suppression on the mind’s environment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 15, 141–152. CrossRef
Wegner, D. M., & Zanakos, S. (1994). Chronic thought suppression. Journal of Personality, 62, 615–640. CrossRef
Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432–442. CrossRef
- Dimensionality Analysis of the Thought Suppression Inventory: Combining EFA, MSA, and CFA
Andreas A. J. Wismeijer
- Springer US
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment
Print ISSN: 0882-2689
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-3505