Developing a short version of the Toronto Structured Interview for Alexithymia using item response theory

Sekely, Angela; Taylor, Graeme J.; Bagby, R. Michael

doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2018.03.002

Cited by 35 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other measures, such as the PAQ (71), have found that a more restricted EOT factor (primarily re ecting one's tendency to not focus attention on one's own emotions) correlates much more highly with other measures of the alexithymia construct, likely representing a better operationalization of the EOT facet of alexithymia. In addition, items re ecting the DFAN dimension of alexithymia have displayed poor psychometric properties in both questionnaire and interview measures, and there is currently debate as to whether these items truly measure part of the alexithymia construct (2,33,(164)(165)(166)(167). Moreover, studies in the autism population examining the correlates of alexithymia have found the DIF and DDF subscales to be most important in predicting clinically meaningful outcomes such as depression, anxiety, and social communication di culties (59).…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: Improving the Measurement of Alexithymia in Autistic Adults: A Psychometric Investigation and Refinement of the Twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale

Williams

Gotham

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Alexithymia, a personality trait characterized by difficulties interpreting one’s own emotional states, is commonly elevated in autistic adults, and a growing body of literature suggests that this trait underlies a number of cognitive and emotional differences previously attributed to autism, such as difficulties in facial emotion recognition and reduced empathy. Although questionnaires such as the twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) are frequently used to measure alexithymia in the autistic population, few studies have attempted to determine the psychometric properties of these questionnaires in autistic adults, including whether differential item functioning (I-DIF) exists between autistic and general population adults. Methods: We conducted an in-depth psychometric analysis of the TAS-20 in a large sample of 743 verbal autistic adults recruited from the Simons Foundation SPARK participant pool and 721 general population controls enrolled in a large international psychological study (the Human Penguin Project). The factor structure of the TAS-20 was examined using confirmatory factor analysis, and item response theory was used to further refine the scale based on local model misfit and I-DIF between the groups. Correlations between alexithymia and other clinical outcomes such as autistic traits, anxiety, and quality-of-life were used to assess the nomological validity of the revised alexithymia scale in the SPARK sample. Results: The TAS-20 did not exhibit adequate global model fit in either the autistic or general population samples. Empirically driven item reduction was undertaken, resulting in an eight-item unidimensional scale (TAS-8) with sound psychometric properties and practically ignorable I-DIF between diagnostic groups. Correlational analyses indicated that TAS-8 scores meaningfully predict autistic trait levels, anxiety and depression symptoms, and quality of life, even after controlling for trait neuroticism. Limitations: Limitations of the current study include a sample of autistic adults that was overwhelmingly female, later-diagnosed, and well-educated; clinical and control groups drawn from different studies with variable measures; and an inability to test several other important psychometric characteristics of the TAS-8, including sensitivity to change and I-DIF across multiple administrations. Conclusions: These results indicate the potential of the TAS-8 as a psychometrically robust tool to measure alexithymia in both autistic and non-autistic adults. A free online score calculator has been created to facilitate the use of norm-referenced TAS-8 latent trait scores in research applications (available at http://asdmeasures.shinyapps.io/TAS8_Score).

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: Improving the Measurement of Alexithymia in Autistic Adults: A Psychometric Investigation and Refinement of the Twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale

Williams

Gotham

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One key contribution of our study is the statistical testing of markers of all aspects of fantasizing that have been hypothesized to be impaired in alexithymia (e.g., Krystal, 1988;Nemiah et al, 1976;Taylor et al, 1999). Our finding that none of these aspects of fantasizing loaded on the alexithymia factor with DIF, DDF, and EOT reinforces suggestions that difficulties fantasizing might be better conceptualized as a correlate of alexithymia rather than a core component of the construct (e.g., Preece et al, 2017;Sekely, Taylor, et al, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

What is alexithymia? Using factor analysis to establish its latent structure and relationship with fantasizing and emotional reactivity

Preece

Becerra

Robinson

et al. 2020

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term "alexithymia" was coined in the 1970s by psychoanalytic psychiatrists Sifneos and Nemiah (Nemiah & Sifneos, 1970; Sifneos, 1973). It derives from the Greek, a (lack), lexis (word), thymos (emotion), and is used to describe a cluster of cognitive and emotional processing deficits that Sifneos and Nemiah observed in patients diagnosed with psychosomatic disorders. Specifically, they observed that patients high in alexithymia seemed to have a marked inability to "describe their feelings or to differentiate among them" and "an absence of the capacity to produce fantasies with the result that [their] thought content [was] restricted to

show abstract

“…Some test developers consequently removed all DFAN items from their alexithymia measures (e.g., Bagby et al, 1994;Sekely, Bagby, & Taylor, 2018) or changed their scoring procedures so that DFAN items were not included when calculating an overall alexithymia score (e.g., Vorst & Bermond, 2001). Until recently, though, this body of empirical work had not resulted in any substantial modifications to alexithymia models and they all still included DFAN within their definition of alexithymia (e.g., Sifneos, 1996;Taylor et al, 1999;Bermond et al, 1999).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

The psychometric assessment of alexithymia: Development and validation of the Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire

Preece

Becerra

Robinson

et al. 2018

Personality and Individual Differences

119

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing a short version of the Toronto Structured Interview for Alexithymia using item response theory

Cited by 35 publications

References 22 publications

WITHDRAWN: Improving the Measurement of Alexithymia in Autistic Adults: A Psychometric Investigation and Refinement of the Twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale

WITHDRAWN: Improving the Measurement of Alexithymia in Autistic Adults: A Psychometric Investigation and Refinement of the Twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale

What is alexithymia? Using factor analysis to establish its latent structure and relationship with fantasizing and emotional reactivity

The psychometric assessment of alexithymia: Development and validation of the Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About