Reliability and Validity of the Interpersonal Guilt Rating Scale-15: A New Clinician-Reporting Tool for Assessing Interpersonal Guilt According to Control-Mastery Theory

Introduction: The last decade has witnessed a resurgence of interest in the clinician’s subjectivity and its role in the diagnostic assessment. Integrating the criteriological, third-person approach to patient evaluation and psychiatric diagnosis with other approaches that take into account the patient’s subjective and intersubjective experience may bear particular importance in the assessment of very young patients. The ACSE (Assessment of Clinician’s Subjective Experience) instrument may provide a practical way to probe the intersubjective field of the clinical examination; however, its reliability and validity in child and adolescent psychiatrists seeing very young patients is still to be determined. Methods: Thirty-three clinicians and 278 first-contact patients aged 12–17 years participated in this study. The clinicians completed the ACSE instrument and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale after seeing the patient, and the Profile of Mood State (POMS) just before seeing the patient and immediately after. The ACSE was completed again for 45 patients over a short (1–4 days) retest interval. Results: All ACSE scales showed high internal consistency and moderate to high temporal stability. Also, they displayed meaningful correlations with the changes in conceptually related POMS scales during the clinical examination. Discussion: The findings corroborate and extend previous work on adult patients and suggest that the ACSE provides a valid and reliable measure of the clinician’s subjective experience in adolescent psychiatric practice, too. The instrument may prove to be useful to help identify patients in the early stages of psychosis, in whom subtle alterations of being with others may be the only detectable sign. Future studies are needed to determine the feasibility and usefulness of integrating the ACSE within current approaches to the evaluation of at-risk mental states.

Download Full-text

A comparison of the ‘Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression’ and the ‘Montgomery-Asberg Depression rating Scale’

Acta Neuropsychiatrica ◽

10.1017/s0924270800036358 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 34-37 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

I.P.A.M. Huijbrechts ◽

P.M.J. Haffmans ◽

K. Jonker ◽

A. van Dijke ◽

E. Hoencamp

Keyword(s):

Clinical Practice ◽

Clinical Global Impression ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Structured Interview ◽

Clinical Impression ◽

Clinical Relationship ◽

Hamilton Rating Scale ◽

Depressive States

SummaryAlthough the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) is the most frequently used rating scale for quantifying depressive states, it has been criticized for its reliability and its usability in clinical practice. This criticism is less applying to the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Goal of the present study is to investigate the reliability and validity, and clinical relationship between the HRSD and the MADRS. For 60 out-patients with diagnosed depression (DSM IV296.2x, 296.3x, 300.40 and 311.00), the HRSD and MADRS were scored at baseline and 6 weeks later by an independent rater according to a structured interview. Also the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) was assessed by a psychiatrist. Satisfying agreement was found between the totalscores (r= .75, p>.000 en r=.92, p>.000 respectively, at baseline and 6 weeks later). Furthermore agreement was found between the items of both scales, and these agree with the clinical impression. The reliability of the MADRS is more stable than the reliability of the HRSD (α = .6367 and α =.8900 vs α = .2193 and α = .8362 at baseline and at endpoint respectively). Considering the ease of scoring both scales in one interview and the widely international use of the HRSD, scoring both the HRSD and the MADRS to measure the severity of a depression seems to be an acceptabel covenant.

Download Full-text

Development and reliability of a standard rating system for outcome measurement of foot and ankle disorders II: interclinician andintraclinician reliability and validity of the newly established standard rating scales and Japanese Orthopaedic Association rating scale

Journal of Orthopaedic Science ◽

10.1007/s00776-005-0937-1 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 10 (5) ◽

pp. 466-474 ◽

Cited By ~ 96

Author(s):

Hisateru Niki ◽

Haruhito Aoki ◽

Suguru Inokuchi ◽

Satoru Ozeki ◽

Mitsuo Kinoshita ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Rating Scales ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Outcome Measurement ◽

Japanese Orthopaedic Association ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Rating System ◽

Foot And Ankle

Download Full-text

Is one good enough? Gauging brand love using a visual single-item measure

Journal of Contemporary Marketing Science ◽

10.1108/jcmars-11-2019-0040 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽

Author(s):

Salim Moussa

Keyword(s):

Concurrent Validity ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Theory And Practice ◽

Single Item ◽

Brand Love ◽

Content Type ◽

Visual Rating ◽

Product Categories ◽

Willingness To Forgive

PurposeThough brand love is recognized as being an important marketing topic both for theory and practice, a gap still exists with regard to its operationalization. To bridge this gap, this paper proposes a single-item measure (SIM) that uses a visual rating scale (i.e., a rating scale combining verbal with nonverbal contents).Design/methodology/approachThree studies covering over 700 respondents and examining three international brands over three product categories were conducted to test the new measure.FindingsFindings provide consistent evidence for the reliability and validity of the proposed measure. They also demonstrate that brand love, as gauged by the new SIM, is good in predicting positive word of mouth, willingness to pay a higher price, and willingness to forgive brand mishaps.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper focuses on brand love mainly from a measurement perspective.Practical implicationsThis paper provides a practical and parsimonious tool to measure brand love.Originality/valueExtant SIMs of brand love are less than ordinal, content invalid, of unknown reliability, and of untested concurrent validity. This paper provides academics and practitioners alike with a SIM of brand love that is ordinal, content valid, and tested in terms of reliability and concurrent validity.

Download Full-text