中国临床心理学杂志

母胎依恋关系量表的修订及信效度检验

作者：聂戈范红霞

单位：1. 澳门城市大学人文社会科学学院澳门 999078 2. 山西大学教育科学学院太原 030006

关键词：孕妇母胎依恋关系信度效度

分类号：R395.1

出版年,卷(期):页码：2017,25(4):675-677

摘要：

目的：引进母胎依恋关系量表（Maternal Antenatal Attachment Scale）并对其信、效度进行检验。方法：来自某妇幼保健院的545名孕妇自愿参与问卷调查。结果：内容效度方面，基于6名专家组成的专业小组评定，肯德尔W系数为0.26（P>0.05），表明量表具有良好的内容效度。结构效度方面，对其两因子结构模型进行验证性因素分析，各拟合指数达到测量学可接受的范围（χ²/df=2.21，GFI=0.94，AGFI=0.92，CFI=0.86，RMR=0.024，RMSEA=0.047）。量表总分与婚姻调适测验和爱丁堡产后抑郁量表的相关分别为0.49和-0.36（均P<0.001），表明量表效标关联效度良好。信度方面，各题目与总分的相关系数为0.30-0.61（P<0.001），Cronbach's α系数为0.77。结论：中文版母胎依恋关系量表是一个信、效度良好的可用于测量母胎依恋关系的工具。

Objective: To adapt the Maternal Antenatal Attachment Scale(MAAS) to Chinese and to perform validity and reliability analyses. Methods: A total of 545 pregnant women agreed to participate in the study in a maternal and child health care hospital. Results: The consistency of specialist opinion on the scale was determined(Kendall W=0.26; P>0.05). The two-factor structure for the original version adapted to the Chinese version. The model fit indexes were acceptable(χ²/df=2.21, GFI=0.94, AGFI=0.92, CFI=0.86, RMR=0.024 and RMSEA=0.047). The MAAS total scores were positively correlated with scores of MAT(r=0.49, P<0.001) and negatively correlated with EPDS total scores(r=-0.36, P<0.001).Cronbach's α value was 0.77, and the correlation between each item and the composite score varied between 0.30 and 0.61. Conclusion: The Chinese version of the Maternal Antenatal Attachment Scale is a valid and reliable tool for the evaluation of the maternal-fetal attachment level in the antenatal period.

基金项目：

作者简介：

参考文献：

1 丁雪辰, 桑标, 李丹. 母亲-胎儿关系:概念、测量和影响因素. 心理科学, 2013, 36(5):1146-1152
2 Cannella BL. Maternal-fetal attachment:an integrative review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2005, 50:60-68
3 Golbasi Z, Ucar T, Tugut N. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Maternal Antenatal Attachment Scale. Jpn J Nurs Sci, 2015, 12(2):154-161
4 Bielawska-Batorowicz E, Siddiqui A. A study of prenatal attachment with Swedish and Polish expectant mothers. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 2008, 26(4):373-384
5 Condon JT. The assessment of antenatal emotional attachment:Development of a questionnaire instrument. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 1993, 66:17
6 Van Bussel JC, Spitz B, Demyttenaere K. Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the maternal antenatal attachment scale. Arch Womens Ment Health, 2010, 13:267-277
7 Navarro-Aresti L, Iraurgi I, Iriarte L, et al. Maternal Anten atal Attachment Scale(MAAS):adaptation to Spanish and proposal for a brief version of 12 items. Archives of Women's Mental Health, 2016, 2:1-9
8 Locke HJ, Wallace KM. Short Marital-Adjustment and Prediction Tests:Their Reliability and Validity. Marriage & Family Living, 1959, 21(3):251-255
9 Cox J, Holden J, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry, 1987, 150:782-786
10 Bowling A, Ebrahim S. Handbook of health research methods:Investigation, measurement and analysis. Glasgow:Open University Press, Bell and Bain Ltd, 2005
11 Busonera A, Cataudella S, Lampis J, et al. Investigating validity and reliability evidence for the Maternal Antenatal Attachment Scale in a sample of Italian women. Arch Womens Ment Health, 2016, 19(2):329-336. doi:10.1007/s00737-015-0559-3
12 Bouchard G. The role of psychosocial variables in prenatal attachment:an examination of moderational effects. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 2011, 29(3):197-207

服务与反馈：

【文章下载】【加入收藏】