An examination of the construct validity of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire

Daniel Waldeck, Luca Pancani, Ian Tyndall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (GPQ) was originally validated against measures of psychological flexibility and psychological distress. However, measures which have substantial conceptual overlap with the GPQ (e.g., the Need to Belong Scale [NTBS], Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale [BFNE]) were not examined. The present study seeks to investigate the construct validity of the GPQ-9. As expected, data from a survey of 272 participants indicated significant large correlations between the GPQ-9 and NTBS and BFNE respectively. The results of a confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the unidimensional structure of the GPQ-9. A structural equation model revealed that the BFNE (and not the GPQ-9 or NTBS) was significantly associated with psychological flexibility and psychological distress. Implications of these tentative preliminary findings suggest that the BFNE and GPQ-9 should be used in different contexts when applied to Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) research.
LanguageEnglish
Pages50-54
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Contextual Behavioral Science
Volume11
Early online date11 Dec 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2019

Fingerprint

construct validity
examination
questionnaire
anxiety
evaluation
flexibility
therapy research
structural model
factor analysis
acceptance
commitment

Bibliographical note

NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, [[11] (2019)] DOI: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.12.003

© 2019, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Keywords

  • Acceptance and commitment therapy
  • Construct validity
  • Generalized pliance
  • Relational frame theory
  • Rule-governed behavior

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Applied Psychology
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
  • Behavioral Neuroscience

Cite this

An examination of the construct validity of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire. / Waldeck, Daniel; Pancani, Luca; Tyndall, Ian .

In: Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, Vol. 11, 01.2019, p. 50-54.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{64c632db089146c98d58f081be1bed77,
title = "An examination of the construct validity of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire",
abstract = "The Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (GPQ) was originally validated against measures of psychological flexibility and psychological distress. However, measures which have substantial conceptual overlap with the GPQ (e.g., the Need to Belong Scale [NTBS], Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale [BFNE]) were not examined. The present study seeks to investigate the construct validity of the GPQ-9. As expected, data from a survey of 272 participants indicated significant large correlations between the GPQ-9 and NTBS and BFNE respectively. The results of a confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the unidimensional structure of the GPQ-9. A structural equation model revealed that the BFNE (and not the GPQ-9 or NTBS) was significantly associated with psychological flexibility and psychological distress. Implications of these tentative preliminary findings suggest that the BFNE and GPQ-9 should be used in different contexts when applied to Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) research.",
keywords = "Acceptance and commitment therapy, Construct validity, Generalized pliance, Relational frame theory, Rule-governed behavior",
author = "Daniel Waldeck and Luca Pancani and Ian Tyndall",
note = "NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, [[11] (2019)] DOI: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.12.003 {\circledC} 2019, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.12.003",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "50--54",
journal = "Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An examination of the construct validity of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire

AU - Waldeck, Daniel

AU - Pancani, Luca

AU - Tyndall, Ian

N1 - NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, [[11] (2019)] DOI: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.12.003 © 2019, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

PY - 2019/1

Y1 - 2019/1

N2 - The Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (GPQ) was originally validated against measures of psychological flexibility and psychological distress. However, measures which have substantial conceptual overlap with the GPQ (e.g., the Need to Belong Scale [NTBS], Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale [BFNE]) were not examined. The present study seeks to investigate the construct validity of the GPQ-9. As expected, data from a survey of 272 participants indicated significant large correlations between the GPQ-9 and NTBS and BFNE respectively. The results of a confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the unidimensional structure of the GPQ-9. A structural equation model revealed that the BFNE (and not the GPQ-9 or NTBS) was significantly associated with psychological flexibility and psychological distress. Implications of these tentative preliminary findings suggest that the BFNE and GPQ-9 should be used in different contexts when applied to Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) research.

AB - The Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (GPQ) was originally validated against measures of psychological flexibility and psychological distress. However, measures which have substantial conceptual overlap with the GPQ (e.g., the Need to Belong Scale [NTBS], Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale [BFNE]) were not examined. The present study seeks to investigate the construct validity of the GPQ-9. As expected, data from a survey of 272 participants indicated significant large correlations between the GPQ-9 and NTBS and BFNE respectively. The results of a confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the unidimensional structure of the GPQ-9. A structural equation model revealed that the BFNE (and not the GPQ-9 or NTBS) was significantly associated with psychological flexibility and psychological distress. Implications of these tentative preliminary findings suggest that the BFNE and GPQ-9 should be used in different contexts when applied to Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) research.

KW - Acceptance and commitment therapy

KW - Construct validity

KW - Generalized pliance

KW - Relational frame theory

KW - Rule-governed behavior

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058400754&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.12.003

DO - 10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.12.003

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 50

EP - 54

JO - Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science

T2 - Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science

JF - Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science

ER -