The Reward Probability Index: Design and Validation of a Scale Measuring Access to Environmental Reward
Section snippets
Participants and Procedure
A demographic form and 24-item RPI were administered to 269 students attending undergraduate psychology courses at the University of Tennessee: 180 females (66.9%) and 89 males (33.1%) with a mean age of 19.6 years (SD = 3.5 years). The sample consisted of 227 Caucasians (84.4%), 28 African Americans (10.4%), 3 Latinos (1.1%), 4 Asians (1.5%), 1 American Indian (0.4%), and 6 individuals who identified themselves as “Other” (2.2%).
Assessment Measure
The original 24-item RPI self-report measure was designed to assess
Participants and Procedure
Study 2 was conducted to further assess reliability, construct validity, and convergent validity of the RPI with measures of environmental reward, depression, anxiety, and social support. These instruments were administered with a demographic questionnaire in the context of introductory psychology undergraduate classes. The sample included 281 students, 168 (59.8%) females and 113 (40.2%) males, with a mean age of 18.8 years (SD = 2.5 years). The sample consisted of 235 Caucasians (83.6%), 33
Participants and Procedure
Study 3 was conducted to assess the predictive validity of the RPI, specifically examining the incremental validity of the RPI in predicting daily diary reports of rewarding behaviors and activities above variance associated with depression. Participants included 33 undergraduates, females: n = 23 (69.7%), males: n = 10 (30.3%), and the sample consisted of 30 Caucasians (90.9%), 1 African American (3.0%), 1 Asian (3.0%), and 1 individual who self-classified as “Other” (3.0%). The mean age of
Discussion
These three studies were designed to establish the psychometric properties of the RPI, a brief self-report instrument assessing access to environmental reward as defined in theories of RCPR (i.e., the number of potential reinforcers, availability of reinforcers, the ability to obtain reinforcement, and exposure to aversive events; Lewinsohn, 1974, Lewinsohn et al., 1980). In other words, the RPI was a proxy measure of RCPR in which the contingencies of interest were the relation of behaviors
References (78)
- et al.
The Environmental Reward Observation Scale (EROS): Development, validity, and reliability
Behavior Therapy
(2007) - et al.
Behavioral activation treatments of depression: A meta-analysis
Clinical Psychology Review
(2007) - et al.
The use of daily diaries to assess the relations among mood state, overt behavior, and reward value of activities
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(2003) - et al.
Contemporary behavioral activation treatments for depression: Procedures, principles and progress
Clinical Psychology Review
(2003) - et al.
Exploring the relation of depression and overt behavior with daily diaries
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(2008) - et al.
Localization of brain reinforcement mechanisms: Intracranial self-administration and intracranial place-conditioning studies
Behavioural Brain Research
(1999) - et al.
The role of the brain reward system in depression
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry
(2001) - et al.
Avoidance and depression: The construction of the Cognitive–Behavioral Avoidance Scale
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(2004) - et al.
Depression and the frequency and strength of pleasant events: Exploration of the Staats–Heiby theory
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(1988) - et al.
Behavioral models of depression: A critique of the emphasis on positive reinforcement
International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy
(2008)