Literature DB >> 12396760

The Psychological Mindedness Scale: factor structure, convergent validity and gender in a non-psychiatric sample.

Merton A Shill1, Mark A Lumley.   

Abstract

Although the concept of psychological mindedness (PM) originated in the psychoanalytic literature, its use has been expanding beyond the realm of assessing suitability for, or psychic change following, psychotherapy or psychoanalysis. For example, since PM bespeaks a capacity to tolerate psychological conflict and stress intrapsychically rather than by regressive means of conflict management or resolution such as somatization, its role, like that of alexithymia, in the genesis of psychosomatic illness is becoming evident. The Psychological Mindedness Scale (PMS), a 45-item self-report instrument intended to measure PM, was administered to a non-clinical sample of 397 undergraduates to assess the stability of its previously reported item-factor loadings and factor structure. Two main factors emerged, viz. Belief in the benefits of discussing one's problems and Access to feelings. Lower-order factors were Willingness to discuss problems with others, Interest in meaning and motivation of own and others' behaviour and Openness to change. Convergent validity of the PMS was also demonstrated by the negative correlations obtained between its total and factor/subscale scores with those of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. The PMS needs further development to increase the congruence between its factor structure and the concept of PM. Females were also found to be more psychologically minded than males. The implications of these findings and the potential uses of this scale are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12396760     DOI: 10.1348/147608302169607

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Psychother        ISSN: 1476-0835            Impact factor:   3.915


  9 in total

1.  Do empathy and psychological mindedness affect police officers' decision to enter crisis intervention team training?

Authors:  Michael T Compton; Beth Broussard; Dana Hankerson-Dyson; Shaily Krishan; Tarianna Stewart-Hutto
Journal:  Psychiatr Serv       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.084

Review 2.  The assessment of alexithymia in medical settings: implications for understanding and treating health problems.

Authors:  Mark A Lumley; Lynn C Neely; Amanda J Burger
Journal:  J Pers Assess       Date:  2007-12

3.  The gender gap in mental health service use.

Authors:  E Pattyn; M Verhaeghe; P Bracke
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 4.328

4.  Gender effect on public stigma changes towards psychosis in the Hong Kong Chinese population: a comparison between population surveys of 2009 and 2014.

Authors:  S K W Chan; K W Lee; C L M Hui; W C Chang; E H M Lee; E Y H Chen
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 4.328

5.  Do personality problems improve during psychodynamic supportive-expressive psychotherapy? Secondary outcome results from a randomized controlled trial for psychiatric outpatients with personality disorders.

Authors:  Bo Vinnars; Barbro Thormählen; Robert Gallop; Kristina Norén; Jacques P Barber
Journal:  Psychotherapy (Chic)       Date:  2009-09

6.  Selecting and imagining rewarding activities during the COVID-19 lockdown: Effects on mood and what moderates them.

Authors:  Jürgen Hoyer; Janina Charlotte Gabriela Dechmann; Tanja Stender; Jasmin Čolić
Journal:  Int J Psychol       Date:  2021-05-04

7.  Uncertainty work as ontological negotiation: adjudicating access to therapy in clinical psychology.

Authors:  Martyn Pickersgill
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2019-11-26

8.  Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in the outpatient treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Ellen Driessen; Henricus L Van; Robert A Schoevers; Pim Cuijpers; Gerda van Aalst; Frank J Don; Mariëlle Hendriksen; Simone Kool; Pieter J Molenaar; Jaap Peen; Jack J M Dekker
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2007-10-26       Impact factor: 3.630

9.  Effect of standardized post-coercion review on subjective coercion: Results of a randomized-controlled trial.

Authors:  A Wullschleger; A Vandamme; J Mielau; L Stoll; A Heinz; F Bermpohl; A Bechdolf; M Stelzig; O Hardt; I Hauth; V Holthoff-Detto; L Mahler; C Montag
Journal:  Eur Psychiatry       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 5.361

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.