Psychometric Properties and Measurement Invariance of the Generalized Tracking Questionnaire-Children

  1. Espitia Pereira CA
  2. Ayala Ávila JM
  3. García Martín MB
  4. Suárez Falcón JC
  5. Ruiz FJ
Journal:
International journal of psychology and psychological therapy

ISSN: 1577-7057

Year of publication: 2020

Volume: 20

Issue: 2

Pages: 177-188

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: International journal of psychology and psychological therapy

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

Self-report measures of generalized patterns of rule-following are being developed in the last years including the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (GPQ) and the Generalized Tracking Questionnaire (GTQ). Specifically, the GTQ is a 11-item self-report developed for adults that has shown excellent psychometric properties, a one-factor structure, and criterion validity in view of its positive correlations with executive functions tests. This study aims to develop the children’s version of the GTQ (i.e., Generalized Tracking Questionnaire-Children, GTQ-C). In so doing, we adapted the vocabulary of some of the GTQ items and added an additional item (i.e., the GTQ-C consisted of 12 items). Afterward, the GTQ for children (i.e., GTQ-C) was administered to a sample of 730 Colombian children and adolescents from 7 to 17 years. A cross-validation study was conducted to analyze the factor structure of the questionnaire. The analysis showed that a one-factor structure showed a good fit to the data. All items of the GTQ-C showed good discrimination indexes and the whole questionnaire showed adequate internal consistency. The GTQ-C showed measurement invariance across gender and age group. In conclusion, the GTQ-C seems to be a valid and reliable measure of generalized tracking for children that might be used to analyze the developmental trajectories of tracking and its relationship with other relevant behavioral processes.

Bibliographic References

  • Barnes-Holmes D, O’Hora D, Roche B, Hayes SC, Bissett RT, & Liddy F (2001). Understanding and verbal regulation. In SC Hayes, D Barnes-Holmes, & B Roche (Eds.), Relational Frame Theory. A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition (pp. 103-117). New York: Plenum Press.
  • Bijou S (1958). Operant extinction after fixed-interval schedules with young children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1, 25-29.
  • Catania AC (2006). Learning (4th Ed.). New York: Sloan. Catania AC, Shimoff E, & Matthews BA (1989). An experimental analysis of rule-governed behavior. In SC Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed Behavior (pp. 119-150). Boston, MA: Springer.
  • Chen FF (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14, 464-504. Doi: 10.1080/10705510701301834
  • Cheung GW & Rensvold RB (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9, 233-255. Doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
  • Ferrando PJ & Lorenzo Seva U (2018). Assessing the quality and appropriateness of factor solutions and factor score estimates in exploratory item factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 78, 762-780. Doi: 10.1177/0013164417719308
  • Grant DA & Berg EA (1948). A behavioral analysis of degree of reinforcement and ease of shifting to new responses in a Weigl-type card-sorting problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 404-411. Doi: 10.1037/h0059831
  • Greiff S & Scherer R (2018). Still comparing apples with oranges? Some thoughts on the principles and practices of measurement invariance testing. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 34, 141-144. Doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000487
  • Hayes SC, Barnes-Holmes D, & Roche B (2001). Relational Frame Theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum Press.
  • Hayes SC, Barnes-Holmes D, & Wilson KG (2012). Contextual behavioral science: Creating a science more adequate to the challenge of the human condition. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 1, 1-16. Doi: 10.1016/j. jcbs.2012.09.004
  • Hayes SC, Brownstein AJ, Zettle RD, Rosenfarb I, & Korn Z (1986). Rule-governed behavior and sensitivity to changing consequences of responding. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 237-256. Doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.45-237
  • Hayes SC, Gifford EV, & Hayes GJ (1998). Moral behavior and the development of verbal regulation. The Behavior Analyst, 21, 253-279.
  • Hayes SC, Gifford EV, & Ruckstuhl LE (1996). Relational frame theory and executive function: A behavioral approach. In GR Lyon & NA Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, Memory, and Executive Function (pp. 279-305). Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing.
  • Hayes SC & Hayes LJ (1989). The verbal action of the listener as a basis for rule-governance. In SC Hayes (Ed.), Rule-Governed Behavior (pp. 153-190). New York: Plenum Press.
  • Hayes SC, Strosahl KD, & Wilson KG (1999). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: An experiential approach to behavior change. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Hayes SC, Zettle R, & Rosenfarb I (1989). Rule-following. In SC Hayes (Ed.), Rule Governed Behavior (pp. 191- 220). New York: Plenum Press.
  • Hu L & Bentler PM (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. Doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
  • Jöreskog KG (2005). Structural equation modeling with ordinal variables using LISREL. Lincolnwood, IL: Technical report, Scientific Software International.
  • Jöreskog KG, & Sörbom D (1999). LISREL 8.30. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
  • Kantor JR (1924). Principles of psychology Vol. I. Chicago, IL: Principia Press. Kelley K & Lai K (2012). MBESS: MBESS. R package version 3.3.2. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MBESS.
  • Kelley K & Pornprasertmanit S (2016). Confidence intervals for population reliability coefficients: Evaluation of methods, recommendations, and software for composite measures. Psychological Methods, 21, 69-92. Doi: 10.1037/a0040086
  • Kissi A, Hughes S, Mertens G, Barnes-Holmes D, De Houwer J, & Crombez G (2017). A systematic review of pliance, tracking, and augmenting. Behavior Modification, 41, 683-707. Doi: 10.1177/0145445517693811
  • Kline RB (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Lowe CF, Beasty A, & Bentall RP (1983). The role of verbal behavior in human learning: Infant performance on fixed-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39, 157-164. Doi: 10.1901/ jeab.1983.39-157
  • Lowe CF, Harzem P, & Hughes S (1978). Determinants of operant behaviour in humans: Some differences from animals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 373-386. Doi: 10.1080/14640747808400684
  • Luciano C, Gómez I, & Valdivia S (2002). Consideraciones acerca del desarrollo de la personalidad desde un marco funcional-contextual [Considerations about the development of personality from a functional-contextual standpoint]. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 2, 173-197.
  • Luciano C, Valdivia S, Cabello F, & Hernández M (2009). Developing self-directed rules. In RA Rehfeldt, & Y Barnes-Holmes (Eds.), Derived relational responding. Applications for learners with autism and other developmental disabilities (pp. 335-352). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.
  • Luciano C, Valdivia S, & Ruiz FJ (2012). The self as the context for rule-governed behavior. In L McHugh, & I Stewart (Eds.), The self and perspective taking: Research and applications (pp. 143-160). Oakland, CA: Context Press.
  • Millsap RE & Yun-Tein J (2004). Assessing factorial invariance in ordered-categorical measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 479-515. Doi: 10.1207/S15327906MBR3903_4
  • O’Connor M, Byrne P, Ruiz FJ, & McHugh L (2019). Generalized pliance in relation to contingency insensitivity and mindfulness. Mindfulness, 10, 833-840. Doi: 10.1007/s12671-018-1046-5
  • Parrott LJ (1984). Listening and understanding. The Behavior Analyst, 7, 29-39.
  • Ruiz FJ, Suárez Falcón JC, Barbero Rubio A, & Flórez CL (2019). Development and initial validation of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 12, 189-198. Doi: 10.1016/j. jcbs.2018.03.003
  • Ruiz FJ, García Martín MB, Suárez Falcón JC, Bedoya Valderrama L, Segura Vargas MA, PeñaVargas A, Henao AM, & Ávila Campos JE (2020). Development and initial validation of the Generalized Tracking Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript. Fundación Universitaria Konrad Lorenz.
  • Salazar DM, Ruiz FJ, Flórez CL, & Suárez-Falcón JC (2018). Psychometric Properties of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire-Children. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 18, 273-287.
  • Salazar DM, Ruiz FJ, & García Martín MB, & Bedoya Valderrama L (2020). Generalized pliance and insensitivity to contingencies in children with learning difficulties. Unpublished manuscript. Fundación Universitaria Konrad Lorenz.
  • Schlinger HD (1990). A reply to behavior analysts writing about rules and rule-governed behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 8, 77-82. Doi: 10.1007/BF03392849
  • Shimoff E, Catania AC, & Matthews BA (1981). Uninstructed human responding: Sensitivity of low-rate performance to schedule contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36, 207-220. Doi: 10.1901/ jeab.1981.36-207
  • Skinner BF (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Skinner BF (1966). An operant analysis of problem solving. In B Kleinmuntz (Ed.), Problem Solving: Research, Method and Theory (pp. 133-171). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Timmerman ME & Lorenzo Seva U (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods, 16, 209-220. Doi: 10.1037/a0023353
  • Törneke N, Luciano C, & Valdivia S (2008). Rule-governed behavior and psychological problems. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 8, 141-156.
  • Vaughan M (1989). Rule-governed behavior in behavior analysis. In SC Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp. 97-118). New York: Plenum Press.
  • Villatte M, Villatte JL, & Hayes SC (2015). Mastering the clinical conversation: Language as intervention. New York: Guilford.
  • Waldeck D, Pancani L, & Tyndall I (2019). An examination of the construct validity of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 11, 50-54.
  • Weiner H (1969). Controlling human fixed-interval performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 349-373.
  • Zettle RD & Hayes SC (1982). Rule-governed behavior: A potential theoretical framework for cognitive-behavior therapy. Advances in Cognitive-Behavioral Research and Therapy, 1, 73-118
  • Lorenzo Seva U & Ferrando PJ (2006). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavioral Research Methods, 38, 88-91. Doi: 10.3758/BF03192753
Data source: Dialnet