Development and initial validation of the Generalized Tracking Questionnaire

Abstract

The concept of rule-governed behavior (RGB) has been used in the behavior-analytic literature as a way to analyze complex human behavior, including thinking and problem-solving. Relational frame theory suggests the existence of two main functional types of RGB termed pliance and tracking. In this paper, we describe the development of the Generalized Tracking Questionnaire (GTQ) and the preliminary evaluation of its psychometric properties and validity through three studies, with a total of 1155 participants. In Study 1, a pool of items describing the main characteristics of generalized tracking was designed and evaluated by experts on the RFT account of RGB. The resulting 11 items were administered to 460 undergraduates to examine the understandability and psychometric quality of the items. The exploratory factor analysis indicated that the GTQ can be seen as a unidimensional scale, with all items exhibiting high factor loadings and corrected item-total correlations. In Study 2, the GTQ was administered online to a sample of 464 non-clinical participants and a clinical sample of 125 participants. The one-factor model of the GTQ obtained a good fit in the conducted confirmatory factor analysis. The GTQ showed measurement invariance across gender and clinical and nonclinical participants. It also obtained excellent internal consistency and correlated in theoretically coherent ways with other constructs. In Study 3, the GTQ and a neuropsychological battery of executive functions were administered to 105 participants. The GTQ showed statistically significant, medium-size correlations with working memory tests, verbal fluency, planning, and behavioral inhibition. In conclusion, the GTQ seems to be a promising measure to advance in the empirical analysis of functional classes of RGB.

Exploring the relationships between rule-governed behavior and adherence to guidelines aiming to reduce the spread of COVID-19

“…Items such as “I make decisions based on my experience and not on what others say” are rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 ( never true ) to 7 ( always true ), with higher scores indicative of greater tracking. Research has supported the factor structure, convergent validity, and reliability of the GTQ ( Ruiz et al, 2020 ). Generalized tracking scores were calculated in accordance with scoring procedures outlined by Ruiz et al (2020) with scores being summed and higher scores being indicative of greater tracking.…”

“…Research has supported the factor structure, convergent validity, and reliability of the GTQ ( Ruiz et al, 2020 ). Generalized tracking scores were calculated in accordance with scoring procedures outlined by Ruiz et al (2020) with scores being summed and higher scores being indicative of greater tracking. The GTQ displayed a good level of internal consistency in the present study (α = 0.869).…”

“…The present findings also revealed that adherence was not related to tracking. However, it is important to note that tracking requires an individual to derive relationships between the rule and its corresponding natural consequences ( Ruiz et al, 2020 ). The present study did not assess participants’ understanding or knowledge of the rules, nor the apparent consequences of adherence for the individual.…”

“…The Generalized Tracking Questionnaire (GTQ; Ruiz et al, 2020 ) is an 11-item measure of tracking. Items such as “I make decisions based on my experience and not on what others say” are rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 ( never true ) to 7 ( always true ), with higher scores indicative of greater tracking.…”

The Status of Rule-Governed Behavior as Pliance, Tracking and Augmenting within Relational Frame Theory: Middle-Level Rather than Technical Terms

“…The first study was conducted by Kissi, et al (2018), the lead authors of which also authored the systematic review paper discussed above. Specifically, participants were divided 1 We would also note that other papers have been published since our informal review of the literature (in April 2020) that could be seen as broadly relevant (e.g., Ghezzi et a., 2020;Ruiz et al, 2020). However, the general argument we are advancing in the current "position" article, that rule-governed behavior, and thus pliance, tracking and augmenting, are best considered middle-level terms, are not fundamentally challenged by the publication of these additional articles.…”