Search

The most commonly used measure of anxiety sensitivity is the 36-item Anxiety Sensitivity Index-Revised (ASI-R). Exploratory factor analyses have produced several different factors structures for theASI-R, but an acceptable fit using confirmatory factor analytic approaches has only been found for a 21-item version of the instrument. We evaluated the fit of all published factor models for the 36- and 21-item ASI-R, modified the hierarchical model using an approach that does not eliminate items, evaluated the invariance of the modified model across Caucasian and African-American subsamples, and compared the reliability and validity of the 36-item and 21-item versions. The 21-item version of theASI-R fit a four factor model, as did the 36-item version after several meaningful model modifications. The modified 36-item model was replicable in independent cases and its structural properties were generally invariant across race. Scores from the 36-item version exhibited superior reliability and criterion-related validity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debate has arisen over whether posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is most accurately conceptualized as representing a discrete clinical syndrome or an extreme reaction to traumatic life events. Recent taxometric research using predominately adult samples appears to support a dimensional model of PTSD, raising questions about the utility of current psychiatric nosology which depicts PTSD as a distinct entity. The present study sought to use taxometric procedures to examine the latent structure of posttraumatic stress reactions among a national epidemiologic sample of 2,885 adolescents. Results were consistent with previous taxometric studies in supporting a dimensional model of posttraumatic stress reactions. The implications of these findings for public policy, as well as the etiology and assessment of posttraumatic stress reactions, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Repeated administration of anxiety sensitivity measures can often produce declining scores, even in ostensible control groups, which is a significant concern for researchers. The reasons for these changes are as yet unknown, but could be because of regression to the mean in samples selected on extreme scores, exposure to general information about anxiety contained in psychiatric interviews, or mere exposure to anxiety sensitivity information. Methods: This study sought to experimentally evaluate these potential explanations using a comprehensive measure of anxiety sensitivity and its subcomponents, a non-anxiety sensitivity measure (self-esteem), and participants representing the full spectrum of anxiety sensitivity. Results: Results indicated significant decreases in anxiety sensitivity scores (but not self-esteem scores) that could not be accounted for by regression to the mean or exposure to information about anxiety in general. Conclusions: Several potential explanations for these findings are reviewed and implications for research study designs are discussed. Depression and Anxiety, 2009. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disgust sensitivity has recently been implicated as a specific vulnerability factor for several anxiety- related disorders. However, it is not clear whether disgust sensitivity is a dimensional or categorical phenomenon. The present study examined the latent structure of disgust by applying three taxometric procedures (maximum eigenvalue, mean above minus below a cut, and latent-mode factor analysis) to data collected from 2 large nonclinical samples on 2 different measures of disgust sensitivity. Disgust sensitivity in the first sample (n = 1,153) was operationalized by disgust reactions to food, animals, body products, sex, body envelope violations, death, hygiene, and sympathetic magic, as assessed by the Disgust Sensitivity Scale (J. Haidt, C. McCauley, & P. Rozin, 1994). Disgust Sensitivity Scale indicators of core, animal reminder, and contamination disgust were also examined in the 1st sample. Disgust sensitivity in the 2nd independent sample (n = 1,318) was operationalized by disgust reactions to animals, injections and blood draws, mutilation and death, rotting foods, and odors, as assessed by the Disgust Emotion Scale (R. A. Kleinknecht, E. E. Kleinknecht, & R. M. Thorndike, 1997). Results across both samples provide converging evidence that disgust sensitivity is best conceptualized as a dimensional construct, present to a greater or lesser extent in all individuals. These findings are discussed in relation to the conceptualization and assessment of disgust sensitivity as a specific dimensional vulnerability for certain anxiety and related disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]