Validación en México de la Escala de Autoverbalizaciones al Hablar en Público

  1. Moral de la Rubia, José 1
  2. Antona Casas, César Jesús
  3. García Cadena, Cirilo Humberto
  1. 1 Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León
    info
    Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León

    San Nicolás de los Garza, México

    ROR https://ror.org/01fh86n78

    Geographic location of the organization Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León
Journal:
PSICUMEX

ISSN: 2007-5936

Year of publication: 2013

Issue Title: PSICUMEX Semestral Magazine January - July 2013

Volume: 3

Issue: 1

Pages: 50-66

Type: Article

DOI: 10.36793/PSICUMEX.V3I1.238 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: PSICUMEX

Abstract

The Self-Statements during Public Speaking (SSPS; Hofmann & DiBartolo, 2000) scale is an instrument that assesses cognitions in a public speaking situation, which commonly generates some degree of anxiety. The SSPS scale showed good psychometric properties in its original study with American samples in the same way as in its validation studies with Spanish samples. Despite its relevance, it was not adapted in the Mexican population. So the aims of this study were: to translate the SSPS scale into Mexican Spanish, to validate its structure of two correlated factors, to calculate its internal consistency, to describe its distribution, to contrast gender differences, and to observe the relationship of the SSPS scale with social desirability, a construct potentially linked to social anxiety. The SSPS scale and the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR; Paulhus, 1998) were administered to a probability sample of university students stratified by gender. The structure of two correlated factors of positive and negative self-statements showed an adequate fit to data and invariance between both sexes by Generalized Least Squares. The Internal consistency was high; distribution was positively skewed. The correlation with social desirability was significant, especially with the self-deception factor. Men averaged higher, but the means of both genders were statistically equivalent when social desirability was controlled. We suggest using the SSPS scale in Mexico, controlling the social desirability bias.

Bibliographic References

  • American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders,fourth edition,text revision (DSM-IV-TR). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. http://dx.doi. org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890423349
  • American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.12.1060
  • Antona, C. (2009). Fobia social: evaluación y tratamiento. México, DF: Trillas.
  • Antona, C. J., Delgado, C., García, L. J. & Estrada, B. (2012). Adaptación transcultural del tratamiento IAFS en estudiantes mejicanos con fobia social: un estudio piloto. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 14, 35-48.
  • Antona, C. & García, L. J. (2008). Repercusión de la exposición y reestructuración cognitiva sobre la fobia social. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 40, 281-292.
  • Antony, M. M. & Rowa, K. (2008). Social anxiety disorder: Psychological approaches to assessment and treatment. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe and Huber.
  • Antony, M. M., Rowa, K., Liss, A., Swallow, S. R. & Swinson, R. P. (2005). Social comparison processes in social phobia. Behavior Therapy, 36, 65-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80055-3
  • Arbuckle, J. L. (2007). AMOS 16.0 user’s guide. Spring House, PA: Amos Development.
  • Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J. & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561-571. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004
  • Byrne, B. M. (2008). Testing for multigroup equivalente of a measuring instrument: A walk through the process. Psicothema, 20, 872-882.
  • Cragg, J. G. (1983). More efficient estimation in the presence of heteroscedasticity of unknown form. Econometrica, 51, 751-764. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1912156
  • Cronbach, L J. & Shavelson, R. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement 64, 391-418. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0013164404266386
  • Gallego, M. J., Botella, C., García, A., Quero, S., & Baños, R. M. (2010). La escala de “Autoverbalizaciones durante la situación de hablar en público” (SSPS): propiedades psicométricas en una muestra española de fóbicos sociales. Psicología Conductual, 18, 343-363.
  • García, C. H. (2009). Cómo investigar en psicología. México: Trillas. García, L. J., Olivares, J. & Vera, P. E. (2003). Social anxiety disorder: Revision of assessment measures for Spanish-speaking population.
  • Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 35, 151-160.
Glass, C. R., Merluzzi, T. V., Biever, J. L. & Larsen, K. H. (1982). Cognitive assessment of social anxiety: Development and validation of a self- statement questionnaire. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 6, 37-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01185725

  • Heinrichs, N. & Hofmann, S. G. (2001) Information processing in social phobia: A critical review. Clinical Psychology Review, 21, 751-770. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7358(00)00067-2

  • Hofmann, S. G. (2007). Cognitive factors that maintain social anxiety disorder: A comprehensive model and its treatment implications. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 36(4), 195-209. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/16506070701421313
  • Hofmann, S. G. & DiBartolo, P. M. (2000). An instrument to assess self-statements during public speaking: Scale development and preliminary psychometric properties. Behavior Therapy, 31, 499-515. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(00)80027-1
  • Hofmann, S. G., Moscovitch, D. A., Kim, H. J. & Taylor, A. N. (2004). Changes in self-perception during treatment of social phobia. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 588-596. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.72.4.588
  • Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
  • MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W. & Cai, L. (2006). Testing differences between nested covariance structure models: Power analysis and null hypotheses. Psychological Methods, 11, 19-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.11.1.19

  • Moral, J. (2006). Análisis factorial confirmatorio. En R. Landero & M. T. González (Eds.), Estadística con SPSS y metodología de la investigación (pp. 445-528). México, DF: Trillas.

  • Muthén, B. & Kaplan, D. (1992). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 19-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1992. tb00975.x
  • Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Manual for Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding: version 7. (BIDR-7). Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems.
  • Pauhlus, D. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding: The evolution of a construct. En H. Brau, D. Jackson & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 46- 69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Preacher, K. J. & Coffman, D. L. (2006, Mayo). Computing power and minimum sample size for RMSEA [Computer software]. Disponible en: http://quantpsy.org/rmsea/rmsea.htm

  • Rivero, R., García, L. J. & Hofmann, S. G. (2010). The Spanish version of the Self-Statements During Public Speaking scale: Validation in adolescents. European Journal of Psychology Assessment, 26(2), 129-135.
  • Rodríguez, M. N. & Ruíz, M. A. (2008). Atenuación de la asimetría y de la curtosis de las puntuaciones observadas mediante transformaciones de variables: Incidencia sobre la estructura factorial. Psicológica, 29(2), 205-227.
  • Sociedad Mexicana de Psicología (2007). Código ético del psicólogo. México, DF: Trillas.
  • SPSS Incorporation (2007). The SPSS base 16.0. User’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
  • Stewart, D. W. & Mandrusiak, M. (2007). Social phobia in college students: A developmental perspective. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 22(2), 65-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/ J035v22n02_06
  • Thrusfield, M., Ortega, C., de Blas, I. Noordhuizen, J. & Frankena, K. (2001). Win Episcope 2.0. Improved epidemiological software for veterinary medicine. The Veterinary Record, 148(18), 567-572. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.148.18.567
  • Turk, C. L., Heimberg, R. G., Luterek, J. A., Mennin, D. S. & Fresco, D. M. (2005). Emotion dysregulation in generalized anxiety disorder: A comparison with social anxiety disorder. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 29, 89-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10608-005-1651-1
Data source: Dialnet