论文部分内容阅读
目的:建立简式情感强度量表(Short Affect Intensity Scale,SAIS)的中文版,并检验其信、效度。方法:831名大学生完成了SAIS等量表,有63人完成120张情绪图片的愉悦度和唤醒度的评分,另有91人间隔1个月第二次完成了SAIS。结果:SAIS中文版的Cronbach’sα系数总量表为0.86,三因子分别为0.86、0.75和0.84;条目间平均相关系数总量表为0.30,三因子分别为0.43、0.32和0.46;间隔1个月的重测信度总量表为0.83,三因子分别为0.79,0.82,0.85;各因子间的相关系数在0.39～0.62之间;正性情感强度与正性图片愉悦度及唤醒度的得分均存显著正相关,负性情感强度与负性图片的愉悦度显著负相关,而与负性图片的唤醒度得分显著正相关。验证性因素分析的指标:GFI为0.93,ACFI为0.92,CFI为0.95;RMSEA为0.045;条目对因子负荷系数在0.39-0.84之间。结论:简式情感强度量表中文版具有良好的信、效度,适用于我国大学生的情感强度评估。
Objective: To establish a Chinese version of Short Affect Intensity Scale (SAIS) and test its reliability and validity. Methods: A total of 831 college students completed the SAIS scale. Sixty - three completed the pleasure and awakening scores of 120 emotional pictures. Another 91 completed the second SAIS one month apart. Results: The total scale of Cronbach’sα coefficient of Chinese version of SAIS was 0.86, the three factors were 0.86, 0.75 and 0.84 respectively; the average of correlation coefficient between items was 0.30, the three factors were 0.43, 0.32 and 0.46 respectively; The monthly test-retest reliability scale was 0.83, the three factors were 0.79,0.82,0.85; the correlation coefficient between the various factors was between 0.39 ~ 0.62; positive emotional intensity and positive picture pleasure and arousal scores There was a significant positive correlation between the two groups. The negative emotion intensity was negatively correlated with the pleasure degree of the negative image, but positively correlated with the negative degree image. Indicators of confirmatory factor analysis were GFI 0.93, ACFI 0.92, CFI 0.95, RMSEA 0.045, and entry-to-factor load factors between 0.39 and 0.84. Conclusion: The Chinese version of the Simplified Chinese Emotion Intensity Scale has good reliability and validity, which is suitable for the evaluation of Chinese college students’ emotional intensity.