摘要目的 探讨冲动-预谋性攻击行为量表(IPAS)在中国青少年人群中使用的信效度.方法 在职校、工读学校及未成年人劳动教养所访谈300名青少年,对近6个月有暴力行为的青少年发放IPAS量表,同时进行Barratt冲动量表(BIS-11)的测定和一般情况调查.随机抽取30名在第3周进行重测.结果 项目分析删除4,5,8,13,23,27六项,对剩余24项条目进行探索性因素分析,KMO检验值为0.646,球形Bartlett检验x=691.93 ( P <0.001),析出预谋性攻击和冲动性攻击2个因子,并将因素负荷小于0.4的7个条目删去,组成17个条目的 量表.对该模型进行验证性因素分析,χ2/df、GFI、AGFI、RMSEA分别为:1.42,0.874,0.837和0.058.总量表和2个因子的Cronbachα系数分别为0.77,0.698和0.729,重测信度为0.74( P <0.05).总量表及2个因子均与BIS-11总分相关.结论 IPAS是一个比较好的对暴力行为进行分类的工具,中文版需要进一步修订,以适合在中国的使用.

abstractsObjective The purpose of the present study was to examine the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the impulsive-premeditated aggression scale (IPAS) in a sample of Chinese adolescents with aggression. Methods 126 adolescents completed the IPAS,Barratt impulsive scale and self-report questionnaires. In order to assess test-retest reliability, the IPAS was re-administered to 30 participants 3 weeks later.Results Item analysis showed that IPAS had satisfactory item discrimination, 6 items were excluded in the later analysis. The internal consistency of the IPAS Cronbach alpha was 0.77 and the test-retest reliability was 0.74.Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated two stable factors of aggression with good internal consistency and construct validity, the value of KMO was 0.646, the χ2 value of Bartlett test was 691.93 ( P <0.001). The confirmatory factor analysis showed that the value of χ2/df,GFI,AGFI,RMSEA were 1.42,0.874,0.837 and 0.058 respectively.The whole scale and the two secondly scales all correlated with BIS-11 and MOAS.Conclusion The results of the current study indicate that the Chinese version of the IPAS is a useful tool to subtyping aggressive behavior among adolescents, but it still need to be modified to apply in China.