دورية أكاديمية
Defining and measuring "psychological flexibility": A narrative scoping review of diverse flexibility and rigidity constructs and perspectives.
| العنوان: | Defining and measuring "psychological flexibility": A narrative scoping review of diverse flexibility and rigidity constructs and perspectives. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Cherry KM; Psychology Department, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada. Electronic address: kcherry@uoguelph.ca., Hoeven EV; Psychology Department, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada., Patterson TS; Psychology Department, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada., Lumley MN; Psychology Department, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada. |
| المصدر: | Clinical psychology review [Clin Psychol Rev] 2021 Mar; Vol. 84, pp. 101973. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Jan 21. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Review |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Elsevier Science Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 8111117 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1873-7811 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 02727358 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Clin Psychol Rev Subsets: PubMed not MEDLINE; MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Publication: Tarrytown Ny : Elsevier Science Original Publication: New York : Pergamon Press, c1981- |
| مستخلص: | Psychological flexibility (PF) is a popular construct in clinical psychology. However, similar constructs have existed since the mid-20th century, resulting in different terms, definitions and measures of flexibility, hindering the advancement of the field. The main measure of PF - the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ-II; Bond et al., 2011) - has also been heavily criticized. To move towards definitional consensus and improved measurement, we surveyed the literature to map PF and related-terms, examine definitional overlaps, and assessthe psychometric quality of prominent flexibility measures. A scoping review was conducted in two databases (PsycNET and SCOPUS). Twenty-three flexibility constructs appeared across 220 articles, and twelve measures were included and rated for quality. PF, psychological inflexibility (PI), and cognitive flexibility (CF) were most prominent. Definitional similarities among prominent flexibility constructs emerged, namely handling distress or interference, taking action, and meeting goals or values. The Personalized Psychological Flexibility Index (PPFI; Kashdan, Disabato, Goodman, Doorley, & McKnight, 2020) appears to be the best measure available to assess PF. Problems with the current use of the AAQ-II were apparent, hindering current knowledge of PF. Definitional consensus and measurement development are vital to advance the field. To this end, recommendations and next steps for researchers and practitioners are outlined. (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.) |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: AAQ; Definition; Measurement; Psychological flexibility; Scoping review |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20210207 Latest Revision: 20231221 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20231221 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.cpr.2021.101973 |
| PMID: | 33550157 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 1873-7811 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.cpr.2021.101973 |