Search

The Stress Appraisal Measure (SAM) captures six different types of cognitive appraisals in anticipation of an upcoming stressful situation. The goal of this article was to examine the factorial structure and the validity of the scale in the French language while accounting for existing limitations in the literature. These include factorial structure instability and low internal consistency for specific subscales across multiple validation studies in other languages. In the first study (N = 425), the results from an exploratory factor analysis reliably suggested the removal of five items, the bridging of the threat and challenge subscales as one, and a new general five-factor structure. The new structure and its construct, convergent, and discriminant validity were confirmed in a second study (N = 308). We discuss the relevance of this five-factor scale for the studies focused on individual differences in stress and appraisals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) can be used to examine the dynamics of suicidal ideation in daily life. While the general acceptability and feasibility of EMA in suicide research has been established, further examination of potential iatrogenic effects (i.e., negative reactivity) and identifying those more likely to react negatively is needed. Participants (N = 82) with current suicidal ideation completed 21 days of EMA (4×/day) and filled in M = 78% (Med = 84%) of the EMA. No positive or negative affect reactivity was observed in EMA ratings over the study period. Retrospectively, most participants rated their experience as positive (69%); 22% indicated mood worsening, and 18% suicidal ideation reactivity. Those with more borderline personality traits, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and higher depressive, anxiety, and suicidal ideation symptoms, were more likely to report iatrogenic effects. In conclusion, while high compliance rates and lack of affect reactivity during EMA indicate that EMA is well tolerated in suicide research, a minority of participants may report subjective mood effects in retrospect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF) is a widely used structured professional judgment (SPJ) tool. Its indices have predictive validity regarding desistance from future violence in adult correctional/forensic psychiatric populations. Although not intended for applied use with youth, SAPROF items lend themselves to an investigation of whether their operationalizations capture only strengths or also risks. With 229 justice-involved male adolescents followed for a fixed 3-year period, promotive, risk, and mixed effects were found. Most SAPROF items exerted a mixed effect, being associated with higher and lower likelihoods of violent and any reoffending at opposite ends of their trichotomous ratings. Summing items weighted using their promotive and risk odds ratios produced statistically significant improvements in predictive accuracy, improvements found also with a cross-validation sample of 171 justice-involved youth. The nature of strengths and implications for the development of SPJ tools and training in their use were discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]