Although the diagnosis of strabismus requires specialist examination, many individuals are aware that they are affected. It is thus possible that self-reporting could be sufficient for population or genetic studies of strabismus; however, the accuracy of self-reported strabismus has not previously been evaluated. In this study, participants in the Genetics of Comitant Congenital Strabismus (CCS) Study were asked to report whether they had strabismus prior to receiving a complete orthoptic evaluation. In 671 individuals studied, the sensitivity of self-report for detecting true CCS was 48.5%, with a specificity of 98.6%, giving a PPV of 92.6% (NPV 84.5%). Self-reporting accuracy was influenced by the direction, size and constancy of the deviation, and by sex but not education. Self-reports produced a misclassification rate of 14.5% for CCS alone and 33.1% for combined CCS or strabismus-associated conditions. Considering this high misclassification rate, self-report should not be used for clinical studies of strabismus.

No description available.

INTRODUCTION: With the rise of non-traditional providers offering influenza vaccination, it is becoming more of an endeavor to obtain documentation on vaccination. Researchers are relying more on self-report of vaccination, but the accuracy of differing definitions of self-reported vaccination status in the context of inpatient vaccine effectiveness studies is not well understood. OBJECTIVES: The first objective of this study was the assess agreement among four different definitions of self-reported influenza vaccination compared against documented influenza vaccination in a group for whom documented vaccination is expected to be available. For the definition with best agreement, enrollee characteristics were examined to assess which were associated with agreement between definitions. The second objective was to assess the effect of ten different vaccination status definitions, including variations of self-report and documented vaccination, on vaccine effectiveness (VE). METHODS: We used data from the inpatient component of the US Flu VE Network study of VE in patients hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI). Variations of self-reported vaccination status were defined and compared to documented vaccination status. Agreement was assessed using the kappa statistic of agreement and other measures of agreement. VE was measured using logistic regression controlling for certain patient demographics and illness characteristics. RESULTS: Self-report with date had the highest percent agreement and kappa statistic (79.5%; 57.7%, 95% CI: 50.1, 65.2). Those in the oldest age groups (18-49 and ≥65 years) and those influenza positive were more likely to have agreement between self-reported vaccination with date and documented vaccination status (p < 0.05 for both age group and case status). Estimated VE differed three-fold depending on definition of vaccination, with documented vaccination having the lowest VE (10%, 95% CI: -54, 48) and self-reported vaccination with date and location having the highest VE (37%, 95% CI: -10, 64). CONCLUSION: Defining vaccination status using self-reported vaccination with date provides the most accurate classification of vaccination status. Older adults and those with lab-confirmed influenza were more accurate in their self-report of influenza vaccination. Differing definitions have an impact on estimated VE, and understanding how VE is influenced by choice of vaccination status definition is important to examine and report in studies of influenza VE.

In some cases, as much as 9% of participants in self-report studies are extremely inattentive (Maniaci & Rogge, 2014). Previous researchers have dealt with this problem by removing inattentive participants from data analyses. A better solution would be to prevent inattentive responding. Self-Determination Theory may provide an effective approach to reducing inattentive responding, specifically by attempting to promote autonomous motivation in research participants. Providing participants with personalized feedback may increase participants’ autonomous motivation, which in turn may lead to more attentive responding. Study 1 showed that participants who are interested in feedback are more attentive throughout an online survey than participants who are not interested in feedback. The next goal was to show through experimental manipulation that emphasizing the opportunity to receive personalized feedback would decrease levels of inattentive responding and increase autonomous motivation. No significant difference occurred between groups in levels of inattention, nor in autonomous motivation. / Includes bibliography. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2018. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。

Title page, table of contents and abstract only. The complete thesis in print form is available from the University of Adelaide Library. / The purpose of this thesis has been to develop new trait-based and abilities-based measures of "emotional intelligence" (EI), and evaluate their psychometric properties. A popular construct, some have claimed that EI is more important than IQ in predicting life success (Goleman, 1995). But developments in the definition and measurement of EI have not kept pace with these assertions. A review of current conceptualisations of EI in chapter I indicated that there is no consensually agreed upon definition of the construct (Van Rooy &Viswesvaran, 2004). In addition, an examination of EI instruments in chapter 2 indicated a number of limitations with respect to their psychometric properties. In particular, self-report measures of EI typically lack discriminant validity in relation to existing personality domains, and comparatively few studies have examined the incremental validity of these measures. A comparison of outcomes both before and after personality is controlled for is also of interest to obtain a more complete picture of the total and unique variance that EI is able to account for. A further limitation of existent performance-based measures relates to scoring methods and ultimately reliability outcomes. Nevertheless, the construct has the potential to be able to account for additional variance in test scores, and has implications for the definition and diagnosis of mental health problems and, where relevant, for the treatment and prevention of such problems. But before such assertions can be made, self-report and performance-based measures of EI need to be developed that demonstrate appropriate psychometric properties. As a result of limitations with existing EI measures, chapter 3 began by focusing on the development of a new self-report, and peer-report measure of EI. The two new measures were developed based on the Mayer and Salovey (1997) definition of EI as the best definition at present on conceptual and empirical grounds. A "domain-referenced" approach to the development of affective test items was adopted to generate questions (Anderson, 1981). Following the development of the new self-report and peer-report instruments, the psychometric properties of both measures were evaluated. In the first pilot study, the reliability, factorial validity, and convergent validity of the two instruments were investigated. The results revealed that the internal reliability levels for both the self-report, and peer-report measure of EI were good. However, an evaluation of the construct validity revealed a factor structure for the two EI measures that was somewhat inconsistent with the theorized factor structure. For the convergent validity, both the self-report, and peer-report measures of EI were significantly correlated with the theoretically related construct of empathy. Both EI measures were only minimally intercorrelated, and the results of paired samples t-tests revealed that self-reported EI scores were (in the main) higher than peer-report estimates. There was also evidence of gender differences in EI in favour of both males, and females. Chapter 3 continued with a second pilot study to investigate test-retest reliability levels, and the convergent validity of the two EI measures in relation to an alternative trait EI measure, the Assessing Emotions Scale (AES). Test-retest reliability levels were good, and there was higher correlation between the self-report, and peer-report measures. Paired samples t-tests again revealed that self-reported EI scores were markedly higher than peer-report estimates. Next, an analysis of the convergent validity of the new selfreport and peer-report measure in relation to a self-report and peer-report AES indicated some support, with modest correlation between the new self-report measure and the self report AES. The modest correlation was attributed to the presence of response bias in the first instrument but not the latter. In contrast, there was good convergence between the new peer-report measure and the peer-report version of the AES. One objective of chapter 4 was to refine the new self-report measure of EI. A second aim was to develop a new performance-based measure of EI scored according to consensus protocols but with improvements to response options and instructions to participants. As part of the development of the new performance-based measure of EI, a new scoring approach was devised termed confidence scoring. The final objective of chapter 4 was to conduct a third study that was designed to comprehensively evaluate the psychometric properties of both the self-report and performance-based measure of EI. The validation process included an assessment of: (l) internal reliability, (2) factorial validity, (3) convergent validity, (4) discriminant validity, and (5) incremental validity (before and after personality was controlled for). Individual differences in gender were also examined. For the self-report measure of EI, there was good evidence for internal reliability, and factorial validity. Likewise, the instrument converged with a measure of empathy, was distinguishable (in the main) from the Big Five personality domains, and was incrementally predictive of grade point average, stress, and loneliness but not general well-being. The incremental validity of the self-report measure ofEI was further supported in relation to low and high scoring EI subgroups for stress, and loneliness. Additional variance accounted for ranged from 5% to 23% prior to the inclusion of personality in the regression equation but decreased to 3% to 12% after the Big Five were controlled for. Results were also indicative of individual differences in EI in favour of males or females, depending upon the ability being tested. With respect to the performance-based measure of EI, consensually scored results exhibited poor to good internal reliability levels, and a good factor structure but only once redundant test items were deleted. The results indicated that consensually derived answers converged with two measures of cognitive ability, was distinguishable from the Big Five, and incrementally predicted grade point average, stress, loneliness, and general well-being in the order of 29% prior to controlling for personality but decreased to between 2% and 7% of variance when the Big Five were entered into the analysis. Where the performance-based measure of EI was scored according to confidence levels, the results revealed an instrument that had excellent reliability, and reasonable factorial validity. Confidence scores were significantly correlated with empathy; both measures of cognitive ability; and exhibited discriminant validity in relation to the Big Five. In addition, confidence scores of low and high scoring individuals were incrementally predictive of loneliness and general well-being in the order of 14% before and 4% to 5% of variance after the Big Five were partialled out. Chapter 5 concluded this thesis by first revisiting the initial aims and reviewing the findings in light of the aforementioned objectives. Based on the above outcomes it was concluded that measures of the EI construct were generally reliable and valid, but there is still a long way to go to evaluate the full utility of the construct. Additionally, contributions of this thesis to an understanding of the field of EI were discussed along with limitations relating to this research. Finally, a number of recommendations were made for future research. / http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1241858 / Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2006

Title page, table of contents and abstract only. The complete thesis in print form is available from the University of Adelaide Library. / The purpose of this thesis has been to develop new trait-based and abilities-based measures of "emotional intelligence" (EI), and evaluate their psychometric properties. A popular construct, some have claimed that EI is more important than IQ in predicting life success (Goleman, 1995). But developments in the definition and measurement of EI have not kept pace with these assertions. A review of current conceptualisations of EI in chapter I indicated that there is no consensually agreed upon definition of the construct (Van Rooy &Viswesvaran, 2004). In addition, an examination of EI instruments in chapter 2 indicated a number of limitations with respect to their psychometric properties. In particular, self-report measures of EI typically lack discriminant validity in relation to existing personality domains, and comparatively few studies have examined the incremental validity of these measures. A comparison of outcomes both before and after personality is controlled for is also of interest to obtain a more complete picture of the total and unique variance that EI is able to account for. A further limitation of existent performance-based measures relates to scoring methods and ultimately reliability outcomes. Nevertheless, the construct has the potential to be able to account for additional variance in test scores, and has implications for the definition and diagnosis of mental health problems and, where relevant, for the treatment and prevention of such problems. But before such assertions can be made, self-report and performance-based measures of EI need to be developed that demonstrate appropriate psychometric properties. As a result of limitations with existing EI measures, chapter 3 began by focusing on the development of a new self-report, and peer-report measure of EI. The two new measures were developed based on the Mayer and Salovey (1997) definition of EI as the best definition at present on conceptual and empirical grounds. A "domain-referenced" approach to the development of affective test items was adopted to generate questions (Anderson, 1981). Following the development of the new self-report and peer-report instruments, the psychometric properties of both measures were evaluated. In the first pilot study, the reliability, factorial validity, and convergent validity of the two instruments were investigated. The results revealed that the internal reliability levels for both the self-report, and peer-report measure of EI were good. However, an evaluation of the construct validity revealed a factor structure for the two EI measures that was somewhat inconsistent with the theorized factor structure. For the convergent validity, both the self-report, and peer-report measures of EI were significantly correlated with the theoretically related construct of empathy. Both EI measures were only minimally intercorrelated, and the results of paired samples t-tests revealed that self-reported EI scores were (in the main) higher than peer-report estimates. There was also evidence of gender differences in EI in favour of both males, and females. Chapter 3 continued with a second pilot study to investigate test-retest reliability levels, and the convergent validity of the two EI measures in relation to an alternative trait EI measure, the Assessing Emotions Scale (AES). Test-retest reliability levels were good, and there was higher correlation between the self-report, and peer-report measures. Paired samples t-tests again revealed that self-reported EI scores were markedly higher than peer-report estimates. Next, an analysis of the convergent validity of the new selfreport and peer-report measure in relation to a self-report and peer-report AES indicated some support, with modest correlation between the new self-report measure and the self report AES. The modest correlation was attributed to the presence of response bias in the first instrument but not the latter. In contrast, there was good convergence between the new peer-report measure and the peer-report version of the AES. One objective of chapter 4 was to refine the new self-report measure of EI. A second aim was to develop a new performance-based measure of EI scored according to consensus protocols but with improvements to response options and instructions to participants. As part of the development of the new performance-based measure of EI, a new scoring approach was devised termed confidence scoring. The final objective of chapter 4 was to conduct a third study that was designed to comprehensively evaluate the psychometric properties of both the self-report and performance-based measure of EI. The validation process included an assessment of: (l) internal reliability, (2) factorial validity, (3) convergent validity, (4) discriminant validity, and (5) incremental validity (before and after personality was controlled for). Individual differences in gender were also examined. For the self-report measure of EI, there was good evidence for internal reliability, and factorial validity. Likewise, the instrument converged with a measure of empathy, was distinguishable (in the main) from the Big Five personality domains, and was incrementally predictive of grade point average, stress, and loneliness but not general well-being. The incremental validity of the self-report measure ofEI was further supported in relation to low and high scoring EI subgroups for stress, and loneliness. Additional variance accounted for ranged from 5% to 23% prior to the inclusion of personality in the regression equation but decreased to 3% to 12% after the Big Five were controlled for. Results were also indicative of individual differences in EI in favour of males or females, depending upon the ability being tested. With respect to the performance-based measure of EI, consensually scored results exhibited poor to good internal reliability levels, and a good factor structure but only once redundant test items were deleted. The results indicated that consensually derived answers converged with two measures of cognitive ability, was distinguishable from the Big Five, and incrementally predicted grade point average, stress, loneliness, and general well-being in the order of 29% prior to controlling for personality but decreased to between 2% and 7% of variance when the Big Five were entered into the analysis. Where the performance-based measure of EI was scored according to confidence levels, the results revealed an instrument that had excellent reliability, and reasonable factorial validity. Confidence scores were significantly correlated with empathy; both measures of cognitive ability; and exhibited discriminant validity in relation to the Big Five. In addition, confidence scores of low and high scoring individuals were incrementally predictive of loneliness and general well-being in the order of 14% before and 4% to 5% of variance after the Big Five were partialled out. Chapter 5 concluded this thesis by first revisiting the initial aims and reviewing the findings in light of the aforementioned objectives. Based on the above outcomes it was concluded that measures of the EI construct were generally reliable and valid, but there is still a long way to go to evaluate the full utility of the construct. Additionally, contributions of this thesis to an understanding of the field of EI were discussed along with limitations relating to this research. Finally, a number of recommendations were made for future research. / http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1241858 / Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2006

The purpose of the present study was to use the principles of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) to increase environmentally sustainable behavior among seven college-aged students. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy involves increasing mindfulness and psychological flexibility. All participants filled out a daily survey that ranked how much they had participated in environmentally sustainable behavior or if they had the opportunity to participate in it at all. Four participants then received three individual, brief ACT sessions with the researcher and three of these participants showed an average of a 20% increase overall in self-reported sustainable behaviors after the brief intervention in both phases, while only one participant had an increase in phase 2 alone at 22.3%. The three participants that did not receive the ACT remained in baseline throughout the study and had minimal changes in responding on the survey. These results suggest that the ACT intervention may have some effect on improvements in sustainable behaviors.

Background: Because it is a strong determinant of chronic disease and mortality risk, physical activity is a health behaviour that is measured in most large health surveys. Questionnaires are the most commonly used method for measuring physical activity in health surveys. In the early 1990’s, an international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ) was created to allow researchers from across the globe to employ the same questionnaire within their country. Several studies have been conducted on the IPAQ to determine whether the responses obtained are comparable when the questionnaire is administered on multiple occasions (reliability) and to determine the ability of the questionnaire to obtain the same physical activity result when compared to other direct measures, considered as “gold standard” (validity). However, none of these studies have been conducted in Mexico. Objective: Examine: 1) the reliability of the IPAQ among Mexican adults by comparing minutes per week (min/wk) spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) from the IPAQ administered two times, 2) the validity of the IPAQ surveys by comparing IPAQ min/wk of MVPA to those obtained by the accelerometer. Methods: 267 Mexican adults who worked in a factory in Mexico City participated. IPAQ was applied in a face-to-face interview during a first clinic visit. Participants received an accelerometer (motion sensor that measures and record physical activity) and wore it consecutively for the next 9 days. In a second visit, participants returned the accelerometer and completed a second IPAQ. The research team cleaned and analyzed the accelerometer data using standardized techniques. Results from the two IPAQ and the accelerometer were compared using the appropriate statistical tests. Results: IPAQ1 and IPAQ2 measures of MVPA were significantly correlated to each other (r=0.55, p<0.01). The MVPA (min/week) measures from IPAQ1 and IPAQ2 were only modestly correlated with the accelerometer measures (r=0.26 and r=0.31, p<0.01). The percentage of the participants who were classified as inactive according to the World Health Organization physical activity guidelines was 18.0% in IPAQ1, 25.1% in IPAQ2, and 28.2% for the accelerometer. Conclusions: IPAQ was modestly correlated to each other and it was lowly correlated to values obtained by the accelerometer. Since IPAQ has been used to obtain physical activity prevalence worldwide, caution should be taken when this instrument is used. Future research should be focused on the importance of including direct measures to measure physical activity levels within epidemiological surveys. / Thesis (Master, Kinesiology & Health Studies) -- Queen's University, 2013-04-18 15:12:21.626

Inattentive responding by research participants may decrease the reliability and validity of self-report measures. The current studies broaden the record of personality traits correlated with inattention by examining individual differences in attachment anxiety and avoidance among adults in romantic relationships. Based upon the characteristics typically exhibited by adults high on attachment avoidance, I expected an overlap between this personality trait and inattention, such that participants higher on attachment avoidance would exhibit higher levels of inattentive responding when answering self-report questions about their relationship. Two studies addressed this hypothesis using both self-report data from individuals and partner-report data from romantic couples to examine the association between a participant’s attachment avoidance and their level of inattentive responding while participating in research focusing on their romantic relationships. Self-reported attachment avoidance was associated with greater inattentive responding in both studies. However, partner-reported attachment avoidance was not significantly associated with inattentive responding in Study 2. / Includes bibliography. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2018. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection