medigraphic.com

2024, Número 3

Siguiente >>

Rev Elec Psic Izt 2024; 27 (3)


La escala AAQ-II de evitación experiencial en población masculina penitenciaria de México: un estudio psicómetrico

Amador ZLO, Martínez SE, Padrós BF

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 41
Paginas: 932-945
Archivo PDF: 435.00 Kb.


RESUMEN

El Cuestionario de aceptación y acción-II (AAQ-II), es el instrumento más utilizado para evaluar la aceptación o flexibilidad psicológica, el cual ha mostrado adecuadas propiedades psicométricas en la versión de 7 reactivos en población general adulta. Sin embargo, en poblacióon penitenciaria no se han estudiado sus propiedades psicométricas. Por ello, el objetivo fue estudiar la estructura interna a partir de un Análisis Factorial Exploratorio, la bondad de los reactivos que la componen, su consistencia interna. Además, se presentan datos descriptivos de los niveles de evitación experiencial en población general de Michoacán (México). Se adminnistró el AAQ-II a 241 personas en reclusión. Se corroboró la estructura unifactorial que han descrito en otros estudios, se observó que todos los reactivos mostraron características adecuadas, y la consistencia interna de la escala total (α = .880) fue excelente. Puede concluirse que el AAQ-II es adecuada para utilizarse en población general de Michoacán (México).


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Bucerius, S. M., Schultz, W.,y Haggerty, K. D. (2023). “That shit doesn't fly”:Subcultural constraints on prison radicalization. Criminology, 61(1), 157-181. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12327

  2. Crewe, B.,y Laws, B. (2018). Subcultural adaptations to incarceration. En J.Woolredgey P. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of prisons andimprisonment (pp. 125–142). Oxford University Press.https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199948154.013.6

  3. Barbosa LMy Murta SG (2015). Propriedades psicométricas iniciais do Acceptanceand Action Questionnaire-II-versão brasileira. Psico-USF, 20(1), 75-85.https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712015200107

  4. Bond FW, Hayes SC, Baer RA, Carpenter KM, Guenole N, Orcutt HK, Waltz TyZettle RD (2011). Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptanceand Action Questionnaire–II: A revised measure of psychological inflexibilityand experiential avoidance. Behavior Therapy, 42(4), 676-688.https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028200

  5. Borgogna NC, McDermott RC, Berry A, Lathan ECy Gonzales J (2020). Amulticultural examination of experiential avoidance: AAQ–II measurementcomparisons across Asian American, Black, Latinx, Middle Eastern, andWhite college students. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 16, 1-8.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.01.011

  6. Buenfil-Heredia, C. A., Vanega-Romero, S.,y Carrillo-Trujillo, C. D. (2024).Flexibilidad psicológica y covid: el Cuestionario de Aceptación y Acción antela Pandemia de Covid-19 (AAQ-COVID-19). Fase preliminar. Psicología ySalud, 34(2), 215-223.

  7. Chang WH, Chi L, Lin SHy Ye YC (2017). Psychometric properties of theAcceptance and Action Questionnaire–II for Taiwanese college studentsand elite athletes. Current psychology, 36(1), 147-156.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9395-x

  8. Correa-Fernández V, McNeel M, Sandoval JR, Tavakoli N, Kahambwe JKy Kim H(2020). Acceptance and Action Questionnaire II: Measurement invarianceand associations with distress tolerance among an ethnically diverseuniversity sample. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science. 17, 1-9.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.04.002

  9. Costa J, Marôco J, Pinto-Gouveia Jy Galhardo A (2014) Validation of thePsychometric Properties of Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II inClinical and Nonclinical Groups of Portuguese Population. InternationalJournal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 14(3), 353-364.

  10. Edwards KAy Vowles KE (2020). Acceptance and Action Questionnaire–II:Confirmatory Factor Analysis and measurement invariance between Non-Hispanic White and Hispanic/Latinx undergraduates. Journal of ContextualBehavioral Science.17, 32-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.05.003

  11. Eisenbeck Ny Szabó-Bartha A (2018). Validation of the Hungarian version of theAcceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II). Journal of contextualbehavioral science, 9, 80-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.07.007

  12. Fledderus M, Oude-Voshaar MA, ten-Klooster PMy Bohlmeijer ET (2012). Furtherevaluation of the psychometric properties of the Acceptance and ActionQuestionnaire–II. Psychological assessment, 24(4), 925-936.https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028200

  13. Flynn MK, Berkout OVy Bordieri MJ (2016). Cultural considerations in themeasurement of psychological flexibility: Initial validation of the Acceptanceand Action Questionnaire–II among Hispanic individuals. Behavior Analysis:Research and Practice, 16(2), 81-93. https://doi.org/10.1037/bar0000035

  14. Hemaid F, El-Astal S, Cangas AJ, Navarro N, Aguilar-Parra JM, Alsaqqa Ay SaqerA (2016). Psychometric properties of the Palestinian version of theacceptance and action questionnaire-II (AAQ-II) applied in the gaza strip.International Journal of Psycho-Educational Sciences, 5(3), 52-59.

  15. Karekla My Michaelides MP (2017). Validation and invariance testing of the Greekadaptation of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II across clinical vs.nonclinical samples and sexes. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science,6(1), 119-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2016.11.006

  16. Kleszcz B, Dudek JE, Białaszek W, Ostaszewski Py Bond F (2018). Thepsychometric properties of the Polish version of the Acceptance and ActionQuestionnaire–II (AAQII). Studia Psychologiczne, 56(1), 1-19.https://doi.org/10.2478/V1067-010-0178-1

  17. Linehan M (1993). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personalitydisorder. New York: Guilford press.

  18. Luciano C y Hayes SC (2001). Trastorno de Evitación Experiencial. InternationalJournal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 1, 109-157.

  19. Lundgren Ty Parling T (2016). Swedish Acceptance and Action Questionnaire(SAAQ): a psychometric evaluation. Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 46(4),315-326, https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2016.1250228

  20. McAndrews Z, Richardson Jy Stopa L (2019). Psychometric properties ofacceptance measures: A systematic review. Journal of ContextualBehavioral Science, 12, 261-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.08.006

  21. Mellín-Sánchez, M.G.,y Padrós Blázquez, F. (2021). Estudio psicométrico de laescala AAQ-II de evitación experiencial en población de México.International Journal of Psychologyy Psychological Therapy, 21, 1, 81-91.

  22. Meunier B, Atmaca S, Ayranci E, Gökdemir BP Uyar, Ty Baştuğ G (2014).Psychometric properties of the turkish version of the acceptance and actionquestionnaire-II (AAQ-II). Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies,14(2), 179-196.

  23. Monestès JL, Villatte M, Mouras H, Loas Gy Bond FW (2009). Traduction etvalidation française du questionnaire d’acceptation et d’action (AAQ-II).European review of applied psychology, 59(4), 301-308.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2009.09.001

  24. Ong CW, Lee EB, Levin MEy Twohig MP (2019). A review of AAQ variants andother context-specific measures of psychological flexibility. Journal ofContextual Behavioral Science, 12, 329-346.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2019.02.007

  25. Ong CW, Pierce BG, Woods DW, Twohig MPy Levin ME (2019). The Acceptanceand Action Questionnaire–II: An item response theory analysis. Journal ofPsychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 41(1), 123-134.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-018-9694-2

  26. Østergaard T, Lundgren T, Zettle RD, Landrø NIy Haaland VØ. (2020). NorwegianAcceptance and Action Questionnaire (NAAQ): A psychometric evaluation.Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 15, 103-109.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2019.12.002

  27. Patrón F (2010). La Evitación Experiencial y su medición por medio del AAQ-II.Enseñanza e Investigación en Psicología, 15(1).5-19.

  28. Pennato T, Berrocal C, Bernini Oy Rivas T (2013). Italian version of theAcceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II): Dimensionality, reliability,convergent and criterion validity. Journal of Psychopathology andBehavioral Assessment, 35(4), 552-563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9355-4

  29. Pinto-Gouveia J, Gregório S, Dinis Ay Xavier A (2012). Experiential Avoidance inClinical and Non-Clinical Samples: AAQ-II Portuguese Version. InternationalJournal of Psychologyy Psychological Therapy, 12(2), 139-156.https://doi.org/10.1037/t41341-000

  30. Rochefort C, Baldwin ASy Chmielewski M (2018). Experiential avoidance: Anexamination of the construct validity of the AAQ-II and MEAQ. BehaviorTherapy, 49(3), 435-449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2017.08.008

  31. Rolffs JL, Rogge RDy Wilson KG (2018). Disentangling components of flexibilityvia the hexaflex model: Development and validation of the MultidimensionalPsychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI). Assessment, 25(4), 458-482.https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191116645905

  32. Ruiz FJ, Luciano C, Cangas AJy Beltrán I (2013). Measuring experientialavoidance and psychological inflexibility: The Spanish version of theAcceptance and Action Questionnaire-II. Psicothema, 25(1), 123-129.https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2011.239

  33. Ruiz FJ, Suárez-Falcón JC, Cárdenas-Sierra S, Durán Y, Guerrero Ky Riaño-Hernández D (2016). Psychometric properties of the Acceptance and ActionQuestionnaire–II in Colombia. The Psychological Record, 66(3), 429-437.https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0183-2

  34. Segal ZV, Williams JMGy Teasdale JD (2002). Mindfulness-based cognitivetherapy for depression: A new approach to preventing relapse. New York:Guilford.

  35. Shari NI, Zainal NZ, Guan NC, Ahmad-Sabki Zy Yahaya NA (2019). Psychometricproperties of the acceptance and action questionnaire (AAQ II) Malayversion in cancer patients. PloS one, 14(2), e0212788.https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.x5tfq6n

  36. Tyndall I, Waldeck D, Pancani L, Whelan R, Roche By Dawson DL (2019). TheAcceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II) as a measure ofexperiential avoidance: Concerns over discriminant validity. Journal ofContextual Behavioral Science, 12, 278-284.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.09.005

  37. Wegner DMy Zanakos S (1994). Chronic thought suppression. Journal ofPersonality, 62(4), 616-640. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00311.x

  38. Wells A (2009). Metacognitive therapy for anxiety and depression. New York:Guilford Press.

  39. Wilson K y Luciano C (2002). Terapia de Aceptación y Compromiso. Untratamiento conductual orientado a los valores. Madrid: Pirámide.

  40. Yavuz F, Ulusoy S, Iskin M, Esen FB, Burhan HS, Karadere MEy Yavuz N (2016).Turkish version of Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II): Areliability and validity analysis in clinical and non-clinical samples. KlinikPsikofarmakoloji Bülteni-Bulletin of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 26(4),397-408. https://doi.org/10.5455/bcp.20160223124107

  41. Žuljević D, Rakočević Ny Krnetić I (2020). Testing the model of psychologicalflexibility in the Serbian cultural context: the psychometric properties of theacceptance and action questionnaire-II. Psihologija, 53(2), 161-182.https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI191015006Z




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com