Fifteen years controlling unwanted thoughts: A systematic review of the thought control ability questionnaire (TCAQ)
Resumen: Thought control ability is a vulnerability factor implicated in the etiology and maintenance of emotional disorders. This manuscript aims to systematically review the use and psychometric performance of the Thought Control Ability Questionnaire (TCAQ), designed to assess people's ability to control unwanted thoughts. Three electronic databases were searched for papers administering the TCAQ published in indexed peer-reviewed journals. Data (participants characteristics, country, study design, etc.) were extracted from the results for qualitative synthesis. The TCAQ's content validity, dimensionality, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent/divergent validity, floor/ceiling effects, and interpretability were summarized. Two reviewers independently screened articles and assessed quality taking COSMIN criteria into account. Finally, the review included 17 papers. The TCAQ has been administered to healthy individuals, students, and adult patients, in six languages from nine countries. We found that the TCAQ, and its shorter versions, demonstrate robust reliability and adequate content validity. Of interest is the TCAQ's capacity to predict performance in diverse experimental tasks focused on thought control. The TCAQ unidimensionality has been supported in exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Regarding construct validity, the TCAQ is significantly related to a wide range of psychopathological measures of anxiety, worry, depression, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, etc. However, as only a few of the included studies had a longitudinal design, we are unable to draw firm conclusions about the measure's temporal stability. Moreover, psychometric aspects such as factorial invariance across different samples have not been analyzed. Despite these limitations, based on available psychometric evidence we can recommend using the TCAQ for measuring perceived control of unwanted thoughts.
Idioma: Inglés
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01446
Año: 2019
Publicado en: Frontiers in Psychology 10, JUN (2019), 1446 [14 pp]
ISSN: 1664-1078

Factor impacto JCR: 2.067 (2019)
Categ. JCR: PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY rank: 45 / 138 = 0.326 (2019) - Q2 - T1
Factor impacto SCIMAGO: 0.914 - Psychology (miscellaneous) (Q1)

Financiación: info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/ISCIII/CD16-00147
Financiación: info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/ISCIII-MINECO-FEDER/RD16-0007-0005
Financiación: info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/ISCIII-MINECO-FEDER/RD16-0007-0012
Tipo y forma: Review (Published version)
Área (Departamento): Área Psicolog.Evolut.Educac (Dpto. Psicología y Sociología)

Creative Commons You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.


Exportado de SIDERAL (2021-01-21-12:24:23)


Visitas y descargas

Este artículo se encuentra en las siguientes colecciones:
Articles



 Record created 2021-01-21, last modified 2021-01-21


Versión publicada:
 PDF
Rate this document:

Rate this document:
1
2
3
 
(Not yet reviewed)