scholarly journals Development and Validation of the Camouflaging Autistic Traits Questionnaire (CAT-Q)

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 819-833 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Hull ◽  
William Mandy ◽  
Meng-Chuan Lai ◽  
Simon Baron-Cohen ◽  
Carrie Allison ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Cassidy ◽  
Louise Bradley ◽  
Heather Cogger-Ward ◽  
Jacqui Rodgers

Abstract Background: Autistic people and those with high autistic traits are at high risk of experiencing suicidality. Yet, there are no suicidality assessment tools developed or validated for these groups.Methods: A widely used and validated suicidality assessment tool developed for the general population (SBQ-R), was adapted using feedback from autistic adults. The adapted tool was refined through 9 interviews, and an online survey with 251 autistic adults, to establish clarity and relevance of the items. Subsequently, 308 autistic, 113 possibly autistic, and 268 non-autistic adults completed the adapted tool online, alongside self-report measures of autistic traits (AQ), camouflaging autistic traits (CAT-Q), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (ASA-A), thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness (INQ-15), lifetime non-suicidal self-injury, and the original version of the suicidality assessment tool (SBQ-R). Analyses explored the appropriateness and measurement properties of the adapted tool between the groups.Results: There was evidence in support of content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, convergent and divergent validity, test retest validity, sensitivity and specificity (for distinguishing those with or without lifetime experience of suicide attempt), and hypothesis testing of the adapted tool (SBQ-ASC) in each group. The structure of the SBQ-ASC was equivalent between autistic and possibly autistic adults, regardless of gender, or use of visual aids to help quantify abstract rating scales.Limitations: The samples involved in the development and validation of the adapted tool were largely female, and largely diagnosed as autistic in adulthood, which is not representative of the wider autistic population. The SBQ-ASC has been developed for use in research and is not recommended to assess risk of future suicide attempts and/or self-harm.Conclusions: The SBQ-ASC is a brief self-report suicidality assessment tool, developed and validated with and for autistic adults, without co-occurring intellectual disability. The SBQ-ASC is appropriate for use in research to identify suicidal thoughts and behaviours in autistic and possibly autistic people, and model associations with risk and protective factors.



2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. W. English ◽  
Gilles E. Gignac ◽  
Troy A. W. Visser ◽  
Andrew J. O. Whitehouse ◽  
James T. Enns ◽  
...  


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah A. Cassidy ◽  
Louise Bradley ◽  
Heather Cogger-Ward ◽  
Jacqui Rodgers

Abstract Background Autistic people and those with high autistic traits are at high risk of experiencing suicidality. Yet, there are no suicidality assessment tools developed or validated for these groups. Methods A widely used and validated suicidality assessment tool developed for the general population (SBQ-R), was adapted using feedback from autistic adults, to create the Suicidal Behaviours Questionnaire—Autism Spectrum Conditions (SBQ-ASC). The adapted tool was refined through nine interviews, and an online survey with 251 autistic adults, to establish clarity and relevance of the items. Subsequently, 308 autistic, 113 possibly autistic, and 268 non-autistic adults completed the adapted tool online, alongside self-report measures of autistic traits (AQ), camouflaging autistic traits (CAT-Q), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (ASA-A), thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness (INQ-15), lifetime non-suicidal self-injury, and the original version of the suicidality assessment tool (SBQ-R). Analyses explored the appropriateness and measurement properties of the adapted tool between the groups. Results There was evidence in support of content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, convergent and divergent validity, test–retest validity, sensitivity and specificity (for distinguishing those with or without lifetime experience of suicide attempt), and hypothesis testing of the adapted tool (SBQ-ASC) in each group. The structure of the SBQ-ASC was equivalent between autistic and possibly autistic adults, regardless of gender, or use of visual aids to help quantify abstract rating scales. Limitations The samples involved in the development and validation of the adapted tool were largely female, and largely diagnosed as autistic in adulthood, which limits the generalisability of results to the wider autistic population. The SBQ-ASC has been developed for use in research and is not recommended to assess risk of future suicide attempts and/or self-harm. The SBQ-ASC has been designed with and for autistic and possibly autistic adults, and is not appropriate to compare to non-autistic adults given measurement differences between these groups. Conclusions The SBQ-ASC is a brief self-report suicidality assessment tool, developed and validated with and for autistic adults, without co-occurring intellectual disability. The SBQ-ASC is appropriate for use in research to identify suicidal thoughts and behaviours in autistic and possibly autistic people, and model associations with risk and protective factors.



2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 7-7
Author(s):  
Brent K. Hollenbeck ◽  
J. Stuart Wolf ◽  
Rodney L. Dunn ◽  
Martin G. Sanda ◽  
David P. Wood ◽  
...  


2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Steinbach ◽  
Heidrun Stoeger

Abstract. We describe the development and validation of an instrument for measuring the affective component of primary school teachers’ attitudes towards self-regulated learning. The questionnaire assesses the affective component towards those cognitive and metacognitive strategies that are especially effective in primary school. In a first study (n = 230), the factor structure was verified via an exploratory factor analysis. A confirmatory factor analysis with data from a second study (n = 400) indicated that the theoretical factor structure is appropriate. A comparison with four alternative models identified the theoretically derived factor structure as the most appropriate. Concurrent validity was demonstrated by correlations with a scale that measures the degree to which teachers create learning environments that enable students to self-regulate their learning. Retrospective validity was demonstrated by correlations with a scale that measures teachers’ experiences with self-regulated learning. In a third study (n = 47), the scale’s concurrent validity was tested with scales measuring teachers’ evaluation of the desirability of different aspects of self-regulated learning in class. Additionally, predictive validity was demonstrated via a binary logistic regression, with teachers attitudes as predictor on their registration for a workshop on self-regulated learning and their willingness to implement a seven-week training program on self-regulated learning.



2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 852-863 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Gunnesch-Luca ◽  
Klaus Moser

Abstract. The current paper presents the development and validation of a unit-level Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) scale based on the Referent-Shift Consensus Model (RSCM). In Study 1, with 124 individuals measured twice, both an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) established and confirmed a five-factor solution (helping behavior, sportsmanship, loyalty, civic virtue, and conscientiousness). Test–retest reliabilities at a 2-month interval were high (between .59 and .79 for the subscales, .83 for the total scale). In Study 2, unit-level OCB was analyzed in a sample of 129 work teams. Both Interrater Reliability (IRR) measures and Interrater Agreement (IRA) values provided support for RSCM requirements. Finally, unit-level OCB was associated with group task interdependence and was more predictable (by job satisfaction and integrity of the supervisor) than individual-level OCB in previous research.



2008 ◽  
Vol 93 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Troy V. Mumford ◽  
Chad H. Van Iddekinge ◽  
Frederick P. Morgeson ◽  
Michael A. Campion


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document