Development and Psychometric Evaluation of a Brief Approach and Avoidance of Alcohol Questionnaire

Development and validation of the physical effort scale (PES)

OBJECTIVES

Previous literature has primarily viewed physical effort as an aversive experience. However, recent research suggests that effort can also be valued positively. These differences in approach and avoidance tendencies toward physical effort may play a key role in the self-regulation of physical activity behaviors. The aim of this study was to develop a scale that measures these tendencies and contributes to a better understanding of physical effort and how it affects behavior.

METHODS

The Physical Effort Scale (PES) was developed in Study 1 based on expert evaluations (n = 9) and cognitive interviews (n = 10). In Study 2 (n = 680, 69% female), content validity and dimensional structure were examined using principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Item reduction was conducted using item response theory. Preliminary construct validity was explored using regression. Study 3 (n = 297, 71% female) was used to validate dimensional structure, internal consistency, and construct validity, and to assess test-retest reliability.

RESULTS

In Study 1, 44 items were rated for content validity, of which 18 were selected and refined based on cognitive interviews. Analyses from Study 2 allowed reducing the scale to 8 items with a two-dimension structure: tendency to approach (n = 4) and to avoid physical effort (n = 4). The two subscales showed high internal consistency (α = 0.897 for the approach dimension and 0.913 for the avoidance dimension) and explained usual levels of physical activity, providing preliminary evidence of construct validity. Study 3 confirmed the two-dimension structure with high internal consistency (α = 0.907 and 0.916 for the approach and avoidance dimension, respectively) and revealed acceptable test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation >0.66). Patterns of associations with other constructs showed expected relationships, confirming the concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of the scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The PES is a valid and reliable measure of individual differences in the valuation of physical effort. This scale can assess the propensity to engage in physically demanding tasks in non-clinical populations. The PES and its manual are available in the Supplementary Material.

Profiling ambivalence in the context of nonsuicidal self-injury

BACKGROUND

We aimed to identify profiles of ambivalence among individuals with a history of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and tested whether profiles differed across various theoretically informed constructs: NSSI-related characteristics, cognitive (outcome expectancies, self-efficacy to resist NSSI), emotional (psychological distress, difficulties in emotion regulation), personality, and incentives to engage/not engage in NSSI.

METHODS

Individuals with a lifetime history of NSSI (n = 224) reported the extent to which they wanted to and did not want to engage in NSSI and completed well-validated measures of the constructs of interest.

RESULTS

Latent profile analysis indicated four ambivalence profiles (avoid: n = 39; moderately ambivalent: n = 85; highly ambivalent: n = 30; approach: n = 70). The profiles differed across a number of NSSI-related characteristics, cognitive, emotional, and incentive-related variables. Differences between the ambivalence profiles and the avoid/approach profiles varied across constructs. For example, the ambivalence and approach profiles were similar for NSSI-related outcome expectancies, but the ambivalence and avoidance profiles were similar for self-efficacy to resist NSSI.

CONCLUSION

Findings highlight variation between the desire to engage or not engage in NSSI that are consistent with the notion of ambivalence. Understanding these differences may allow for a more person-centered approach in treatment for NSSI.

Support for a two-dimensional model of food craving using self-report questionnaire and cue-reactivity methodologies

OBJECTIVE

Evidence supports the transdiagnostic importance of food cravings across the spectrum of disordered eating behaviors. The ambivalence model of craving (AMC), originally applied to substance use craving, highlights the need to consider not just the motivational state of "approach," but also that of "avoidance." The aims of this project were to (a) extend the existing literature by providing additional psychometric support for the food approach and avoidance questionnaire (FAAQ), (b) extend research supporting the validity of applying the AMC to disordered eating by incorporating a cue-reactivity paradigm, and (c) examine the unique contributions of the FAAQ and in-the-moment cue-elicited craving to the prediction of disordered eating.

METHOD

Participants (N = 223; 52.0% female, age M = 20.51 years) were recruited from a large southeastern university. Participants completed a food cue-reactivity paradigm and measures of food craving and disordered eating in a lab setting.

RESULTS

The factor structure and construct validity of the FAAQ was supported and both general states of food craving (i.e., FAAQ) and cue-elicited food craving were incrementally associated with the spectrum of disordered eating behaviors. As anticipated, both FAAQ and in-the-moment cue-elicited approach were primarily associated with overeating behaviors, whereas FAAQ and cue-elicited avoidance were primarily associated with restrictive eating behaviors.

DISCUSSION

Findings highlight the importance of including an avoidance dimension of food craving and have important implications for disordered eating prevention and intervention work.