P02-138 - Reliability and Validity of the Ref Scale for Referential Thinking

Abstract

In previous works we demonstrated the utility of the REF scale for the assessment referential thinking (Rodríguez-Testal et al., 2001) although it wasn´t specific for patients with psychotic disorder (Rodríguez-Testal et al., 2008). Objectives and hypotheses: We analyzed the psychometric properties of reliability and validity of the REF scale. We compared the differences in referential thinking between subjects with and without psychopathology. In the patient group we will not obtain differences in referential-thinking between diagnosis types of Axis I, Axis II, or patients with diagnoses on both axes. Methods: Participants: 120 subjects, 70 patients attending a private center of clinic psychology, 64.3% women, mean age = 35.21 (SD = 10.5) and 50 controls selected from the normal population, 54 % women, mean age = 33.48 (SD = 10.83). It was applied a cross design for a correlation method of comparison between groups. All the analysis were accepted at p< .05. Results: We reached adequate internal consistency (Cronbach´s alpha= .90, split-half reliability= .83 and .82). The test-restest reliability was significant (mean interval of 44 days). There are significant differences in referential thinking between subjects with and without psychopathology (t=3.8; p=.001). There are significant differences in referential thinking between types of diagnoses (F=3.99; p=.001). Conclusions: The REF scale has adequate psychometric properties (reliability and validity). It discriminated between patients and no-patients, and between the different types of diagnoses, especially for those who suffer psychotic disorders.

Body image and adolescence: A behavioral impairment model

“…In this study, consistency for anxiety symptoms was α = 0.80 and depressive symptoms was α = 0.70. (Lenzenweger et al, 1997) follow-up instrument BPRS) has a cutoff point of 7 with 66% specificity and 58% sensitivity (Senín-Calderón et al, 2010). In this study consistency was α = 0.82.…”

Relationship between inner dialog and ideas of reference and the mediating role of dissociation

“…Referential Thinking Scale (REF , Lenzenweger et al ., ; Spanish version by Senín‐Calderón et al . ) . This is a self‐report instrument with 34 true/false items designed to measure self‐referential thinking and experiences, including ideas of reference (IR) with different contents.…”

A Mediation Model for Ideas of Reference

“…The Spanish version was validated for controls and patients, and has an α of up to .90 (.83 and .82 on each half) and a retest α of .76 (average interval of 44 days in patients). The validity criterion (with regard to the clinical follow-up instrument Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS]) had a cutoff point of 7 with 66% specificity and 58% sensitivity (Senín-Calderón et al., 2010). In this study consistency was α = .91 in the patients group and α = .82 in the control group.…”