4.0 Article

Testing the Psychometric Properties of the Newly Developed ACTive Values Wheel

期刊

PSYCHOLOGICAL RECORD
卷 71, 期 3, 页码 461-471

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40732-020-00447-6

关键词

Values; Measurement; Acceptance and commitment therapy; Values Wheel; Mobile app; Committed action

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated the psychometric properties of the ACTive Values Wheel, indicating evidence of validity in some aspects but not found incremental validity over existing measures of valued living.
Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) emphasizes values and behavioral commitments to help individuals achieve goals and manage emotions. This study evaluated the preliminary psychometric properties of the ACTive Values Wheel, a smartphone application-based psychometric instrument. ACTive provides a weighted and idiographic index of individuals' self-reported values-directed behavior. One hundred sixty adults participated on an individual basis to complete the ACTive Values Wheel and questionnaire measures of well-being, psychological distress, psychological flexibility, and valued living to assess the convergent, incremental, discriminant, and criterion-related validity of the ACTive Values Wheel. The ACTive Values Wheel showed evidence of convergent and criterion-related validity through significant positive correlations with existing measures of valued living, emotional well-being, and openness to experience, respectively. Likewise, discriminant validity was evidenced by a nonsignificant correlation with age. However, evidence of incremental validity over and above existing measures of valued living was not found. These findings provide preliminary support for the psychometric properties of the ACTive Values Wheel. Accounting for the methodological limitations of the study, the ACTive Values Wheel shows potential as an accessible and interactive measure of self-reported values-directed behavior that could be extended to other languages and cultural contexts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据