1988
DOI: 10.1037/0021-843x.97.1.87
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Expanded Attributional Style Questionnaire.

Abstract: Investigations of the learned helplessness model of depression have been hampered by the modest reliability of measures of explanatory style: the habitual tendency to explain bad events with internal, stable, and global causes. We describe a new measure of explanatory style, the Expanded Attributional Style Questionnaire, and its use in a preliminary study with 140 college students. Individual dimensions of explanatory style were reliable, were correlated with depressive symptoms, and predicted actual causal e… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
155
0
4

Year Published

1990
1990
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 228 publications
(162 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
3
155
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…They then rate that event along three 7-point Likert scales according to its internality (7) vs. externality (1), stability (7) vs. instability (1), and globality (7) vs. specificity (1). Each of these dimensions has been shown to possess an acceptable level of internal consistency (.66, .85, and .88, respectively;Peterson & Villanova, 1988). A composite of the stability and globality scores for each of the twelve items was calculated to form the ASQ Generality subscale with higher scores representing a more negative attributional style.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They then rate that event along three 7-point Likert scales according to its internality (7) vs. externality (1), stability (7) vs. instability (1), and globality (7) vs. specificity (1). Each of these dimensions has been shown to possess an acceptable level of internal consistency (.66, .85, and .88, respectively;Peterson & Villanova, 1988). A composite of the stability and globality scores for each of the twelve items was calculated to form the ASQ Generality subscale with higher scores representing a more negative attributional style.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Later, an extended version of the ASQ was developed with an internal consistency between 0.80 and 0.90. It was termed Expanded Attributional Style Questionnaire (EASQ) (Peterson and Villanova 1988).…”
Section: Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ages ranged from 17 to 28 (M = 18.8, SD = 1.4); 93 were Caucasian and 94 had never been married. At initial testing, participants completed a packet that contained eight instruments: Background Information (demographic and historical information); the Typology of Psychic Distress (Mellinger, Balter, Uhlenhuth, Cisin, & Parry, 1978;Mellinger et al, 1983); Levels of Attribution and Change Scale (Norcross et al, 1984(Norcross et al, , 1985; the Stages of Change Questionnaire (McConnaughy, Prochaska, & Velicer, 1983;Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983), specifically, the precontemplation and contemplation scales; the expanded (Peterson & Villanova, 1988) Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ; Peterson et al, 1982); the Gladding, Lewis, and Adkins (1981;Gladding & Clayton, 1986) scale of religiosity; the Psychological-Mindedness scale of the revised California Psychological Inventory (CPI; Gough, 1987); and the Social Desirability scale of the Personality Research Form (PRF; Jackson, 1976). At subsequent testing, participants recornpleted the LAC Scale at either a 2-week (n = 44) or a 4-week (n = 51) interval.…”
Section: Subjects and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%