Asiye Moradi; Ziba Barghi Irani; Mohammad Javad Bagiyan Koulemarz; Kolsoum Kariminejad; Maryam Zabet
Volume 6, Issue 2 , February 2018, , Pages 57-82
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the current research was to examine factor determination and psychometric features of the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire. Method: The research design was correlational study. The population was college students and clients in psychotherapy and counseling centers ...
Read More
Aim: The aim of the current research was to examine factor determination and psychometric features of the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire. Method: The research design was correlational study. The population was college students and clients in psychotherapy and counseling centers in Kermanshah. The nonclinical student sample was 250 subjects selected randomly (simple) from among the students of the Razi University. Overall, the clients in psychotherapy and counseling clinics in Kermanshah were 100 persons selected by convenient sampling and completed the multidimensional experiential avoidance questionnaire, positive and negative affect schedule, acceptance and action questionnaire-second version, revised questionnaire of personality and cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire (for divergent validation). To analyze the data, factor analysis method, Cronbach's Alpha coefficient and Pearson correlation were run by SPSS 22 and AMOS 21. Results: The result indicated that there were direct and significant relationships among experiential avoidance with negative affect, acceptance and action, negative emotion regulation strategies and neuroticism (P≤0/001). Furthermore, there was a reverse and significant relationship between positive effects and positive strategies of cognitive emotion regulation (P≤0/001). The results of discriminant validity showed that there were significant differences between two groups of clinical and nonclinical in behavioral avoidance, confusion disgust, procrastination, distraction/stop, denial, repression and distress tolerance (P≤0/001). The results from confirmatory factor analysis confirmed 44 items into 6 factors. The amounts of Goodness of fit Index (GFI), Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) were at an acceptable level. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for total of the questionnaire was 0.842, behavioral avoidance 0.891, confusion disgust 0.828, procrastination 0.794, distraction/stop 0.681, denial/repression 0.822, and for distress tolerance 0.818. Conclusion: The Persian version of the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire in college students population and clinical people have the acceptable psychometric features and might be used as a valid instrument in psychological studies.
