A number of instruments have been developed to measure ACT-specific processes. This section of the site will provide more information about these instruments, including downloads when available.
Measures are being developed very rapidly, and we encourage developers to contribute updates to this section of the site as often as possible. Interested parties are also encouraged to join the ACT listserv to learn of updated measures. Click on an instrument below to learn more about it.
ACBS Members: If you have an ACT-specific measure you would like listed here, click on the "add child page" link at the bottom of this page. When adding your content, remember that you can attach relevant files and documents.
Acceptance and Action Questionnaire - II (AAQ-II)
The AAQ-II was developed in order to establish an internally consistent measure of ACT’s model of mental health and behavioral effectiveness. Although the original AAQ (Hayes, Luoma, Bond, Masuda and Lillis, 2006), obtaining sufficient alpha levels for it has at times been a problem. It appears that there are several reasons for this (e.g., scale brevity, item wording, item selection procedures), and they were addressed in developing the AAQ-II. As a result, it is recommended that researchers and practitioners use this newer scale instead of the original AAQ (which from here forward will be termed the AAQ-I).
The AAQ-II was designed to assess the same construct as the AAQ-I and, indeed, the two scales correlate at .82. Thus, the AAQ-I can still be used, and findings based on it are still relevant, but it is perhaps psychometrically safer to use the AAQ-II. The reference for the AAQ-II is: Bond, F.W., Hayes, S.C., Baer, R.A., Carpenter, K.M., Orcutt, H.K., Waltz, T. & Zettle, R.D. (Submitted).
Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire – II: A revised measure of psychological flexibility and acceptance. (Note that authorship order was alphabetically determined for Carpenter, Orcutt, Waltz, and Zettle.)
What do we call ACT's model of mental health and behavioral effectiveness? (Or, what does the AAQ-I and -II measure?)
[Taken from Bond et al. (Submitted)]
When ACT was originally developed, the overarching term for its underlying model was experiential avoidance – the attempt to alter the form, frequency, or situational sensitivity of negative private events (e.g., thoughts, feelings, and physiological sensations), even when doing so leads to behavioral difficulties (Hayes, Wilson, Gifford, Follette, & Strosahl, 1996). Acceptance was the term used to positively describe this model; thus, it is defined as the willingness to experience (i.e., not alter the form, frequency, or sensitivity of) unwanted private events, in the pursuit of one’s values and goals.
The ACT model has matured over the years, with more emphasis on the dynamic and flexible fit between context, private experiences and valued action, which have always been inherent in the model. Such flexibility is seen when ACT therapists note that sometimes persisting in behavior is helpful, while at other times changing it is helpful: it depends upon the value- and goal-related opportunities that are available in a given context. Furthermore, as other parts of the ACT model are now given emphasis (e.g., cognitive defusion, contacting the present moment, mindfulness, and perspective-taking), experiential avoidance and, hence, acceptance are taking on a narrower meaning and are being used less often as terms for the overarching model (Hayes et al., 2006). Instead, the term psychological flexibility (or flexibility) is now being used to describe this model. It is defined as the ability to fully contact the present moment and the thoughts and feelings it contains without needless defense, and, depending upon what the situation affords, persisting or changing in behavior in the pursuit of goals and values (Hayes et al., 2006). While experiential avoidance and acceptance are still useful and acceptable ways to describe this construct, psychological flexibility is the more current and overarching term. In addition, it needs to be acknowledged that in some contexts (e.g., industrial-organizational psychology) it is important to speak of this domain positively (acceptance or flexibility) and in other contexts (e.g., psychopathology) it is easier to speak of it negatively (experiential avoidance or psychological inflexibility). These differences are terminological, not substantive.
The AAQ-II and key psychometric findings for the scale can be found below. Older versions of the AAQ (i.e., AAQ-9, AAQ-16 and AAQ-49) are also listed below.
There are more specific acceptance and defusion measures available. A good measure has been developed in the area of smoking (contact Elizabeth Gifford for more information: elizgifford@earthlink.net); a pain measure developed from the earliest versions of the AAQ called the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ; see attachments below) has been published and worked very well in this area (contact Lance McCracken for more information: Lance.McCracken@rnhrd-tr.swest.nhs.uk).
Several AAQ measures for specific problems and populations are posted under Disease and disorder specific AAQ variations.
There are also a variety of translated versions of the AAQ and AAQ-II posted under ACT measures in Languages Other than English.
Other values measures are under development.
Kelly Wilson (kwilson@olemiss.edu) or Matthew Smout (matthew.smout@saugov.sa.gov.au) are working on other approaches, and you may want to contact them.
This is a new approach developed by J. T. Blacklege and Joe Ciarocchi at the University of Wollongong.
In an August 2005 email J. T. said this
Joseph Ciarrochi & I (with invaluable suggestions from Steve) have just finished designing two new ACT values questionnaires that borrow elements from Sheldon's Personal Striving assessment form (Joseph discovered Kennon Sheldon's work a while back and it pointed us in a direction we felt might enhance ACT values assessment).
One is a full-length form called the Personal Values Questionnaire (which measures all 9 ACT values domains); the second is called the Social Values Survey (which measures only social, family, and couples relationships) that we tailored for a brief intervention with young adolescents.
There is currently no psychometric data for either (they are changed enough that Sheldon's Personal Striving data is largely irrelevant), though we will be validating the SVS on a sample of 8th graders in a few weeks, and validating the PVQ on a university student sample early next year. Please feel more than free to validate these questionnaires on any samply you see fit (just let us know--we'd love to see the data). The format of the questionnaire is close enough to Sheldon's for us to expect the measures to have similarly reasonable psychometric properties, but, of course, who knows until we see data.
We had two primary purposes in mind while we were designing these instruments. First, we wanted to describe each values domain in a way likely to influence subjects to write relatively ACT-consistent values--even if these subjects had not been exposed to ACT therapy. As we all know, ACT talks about values in a different way than the term is usually used--and it's thus hard to expect someone not familiar with ACT to state a value in an ACT-consistent way without interacting with a therapist.. We wanted to make it clear to subjects that by value, we are referring to unilateral actions that are likely to lead to increased vitality, meaning, purpose--not static end states that appear implicitly out of one's control. In other words, to avoid getting responses like "I value close friendships", we included prompts like, "What kinds of friendships would you most like to build? If you were able to be the best friend possible, how would you behave toward your friends? For example, you might value building friendships that are supportive, considerate, caring, accepting, loyal, or honest—but choose for yourself which qualities you would most like to bring to your friendships. " Some subtle changes from wording used on previous versions of values questionnaires, but we felt the 'build' theme, along with examples, seemed to provide the kind of prompts that might be more helpful.
Second, we wanted to include Likert-scale questions that assessed things like how much each stated value might be a function of things like pliance or experiential avoidance. Steve oriented us back toward RFT/rule governed behaviour terms that capture what we were trying to assess: as it stands now, question one under each values domain on the SVS and PVQ assesses pliance, question 2 assesses avoidant tracking, and questions 3 & 4 assess augmentals. There are also items that get at importance of each value, effectiveness in moving toward it, etc. As it stands (using Sheldon's scoring algorithms and common sense), subtracting the sum of items 1 & 2 from the sum of items 3 & 4 would yield a sort of 'value purity' score that tells us to what degree a subject/client values the stated value for the reasons we'd hope for from an ACT perspective (higher positive score = greater 'purity' of the value; negative score means the 'value' is actually a function of pliance and/or avoidance).
We've also similarly updated the SVS. Please use this version rather than the previously posted one.
We were a bit reluctant to do this as it basically invalidates what little prior data there is for the Personal Values Questionnaire, but it made sense to us under the circumstances.
We’ve gone through two sets of reformatting and rewording the instrument. The first ‘re-draft’ was spurred by Ann Bailey, who rightfully noted that the wording of some of the Likert items was a bit complicated for those with a sub-college writing level and that the ordering of the Likert questions did not flow very well. This re-draft has been up on the ACBS site for a couple of years now.
The most recent changes occurred late last year. In the process of translating the instrument into German, Andrew Gloster and two of his doctoral students at Dresden Technical University noted that the prompts provided for the domain-specific values narratives differed across domains.
I had initially done this to provide a variety of ways of talking about values in the hope that subjects who had not been through ACT therapy might still ‘get’ what a value is. Andrew, I think rightfully, questioned this strategy as the different prompts might differentially cue different qualities of responses across domains, resulting in narratives (and subsequently, Likert ratings on those narratives) that might be functionally different.
So, in advance of that translation, we decided on a uniform values narrative prompt to be used across all domains. That served as the basis for the German translation, which I’ve also attached. I’m posting both of these on the ACBS site, but wanted to send them here as well as I know some others have used or plan to use the PVQ for research, etc (Martin Cernval from Uppsala University will be beginning a Swedish translation soon, for example).
I thought about further modifying the instrument (e.g., I really like Kelly Wilson’s addition of Parenting and Aesthetics values domains to the VLQ), but the instrument is beastly enough already. Functionally, it’s still the same instrument—except, hopefully, the aspects of the original instrument that functioned to confuse some subjects and potentially yield differentially ‘ACT-consistent’ (for lack of a better phrase) across domains have been eliminated!
The Valued Living Questionnaire is a simple questionnaire originally developed as a clinical tool. It's categories map relatively closely to the categories in the original ACT book (no surprise, since I authored both). I have also added a short working guide to its use. We have a paper describing its basic psychometric properties. A preprint is available here on the ACBS site Download Manuscript. The manuscript contains a copy of the VLQ. Feel free to email me Kelly G. Wilson for any updates. Also, to get a better flavor of the values work, I would recommend reading my chapter with Amy Murrell in the Mindfulness and Acceptance book. The chapter is also available here on this site: Values Work in ACT.
peace all,
Kelly
This is an approach developed by Tobias Lundgren and JoAnne Dahl at the University of Uppsala and successful used in a recent study on reducing epileptic seizures with ACT.
see attachement - & feel free to change it as you like - one is a word doc. & then a jpeg
The ACT daily diary and weekly report (see attachments below) can be clinically useful in monitoring progress.
This page includes a list of translated ACT measures. As a courtesy, if you use these versions in research it is common to contact the translator and let them know of the study -- certainly before publishing it.
AAQ translated in Chinese.
Author contact information:
Ai-Ti Tseng
Department of Psychology
National Cheng Chi University, Taiwan
93752006@nccu.edu.tw
Also here: http://www.contextualpsychology.org/questionnaire_dacceptation_et_daction
AAQ translated in Hebrew.
Liad Bareket-Bojmel
Department of Behavioral Sciences
Ben-Gurion University
liadbar@bgu.ac.il
Spanish version of the AAQ.
References:
Barraca, J. (2004). Spanish Adaptation of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ). International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 4, (3), 505-515.
16 question AAQ in Korean.
Courtsey of HEO, Jaehong.
AAQ-II translated in Dutch.
Version française de l'AAQ-II à paraître dans la Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée. Les résultats indiquent que la version française du questionnaire d'acceptation et d'action-II est fiable et valide. Elle peut donc être utilisée en recherche comme en clinique. [French version of AAQ-II (in press in European Review of Applied Psychology; Abstract below)]
Résumé: L'évitement d'expériences psychologiques douloureuses a été choisi comme cible privilégiée par plusieurs nouvelles approches thérapeutiques issues des thérapies comportementales et cognitives. La tentative de suppression des événements psychologiques désagréables conduit à une perte de la flexibilité psychologique fortement corrélée avec un nombre important et varié de troubles psychologiques. Ces nouvelles approches thérapeutiques tentent d'accroître l'acceptation afin de lutter contre cette rigidité psychologique. Parmi ces approches, la thérapie d'acceptation et d'engagement (ACT) évalue la flexibilité psychologique au moyen du questionnaire d'acceptation et d'action (AAQ-II), qui présente de bonnes propriétés psychométriques. Une version française de l'AAQ-II est ici évaluée sur un groupe de 210 sujets témoins et de 118 patients souffrant de troubles anxieux ou dépressifs. La version française de l'AAQ-II présente une bonne consistance interne. Sa validité concourante comme sa validité de construit semblent solides. Le questionnaire est fiable dans une évaluation en test-retest. La structure factorielle à un facteur de la version francophone de l'AAQ-II est la même que celle de la version originale. Ces résultats assurent une utilisation de la version française de l'AAQ-II en recherche comme en pratique clinique.
[FRENCH TRANSLATION AND VALIDATION OF THE ACCEPTANCE & ACTION QUESTIONNAIRE (AAQ-II)
Keywords: Acceptance & action questionnaire (AAQ-II), Acceptance and commitment therapy, Psychological flexibility
Abstract: Avoidance of painful psychological experience has been chosen as the prime target by several new therapeutic approaches derived from cognitive and behavioral therapies. Attempts to suppress unpleasant emotional events lead to a loss of psychological flexibility strongly correlated with a significant number and variety of psychological disorders. These new therapeutic approaches attempt to increase acceptance in order to decrease this psychological rigidity. Among these approaches, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) measures psychological flexibility by mean of Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ-II), which presents good psychometric properties. A French version of the AAQ-II was evaluated in a group of 210 control subjects and 118 patients with anxiety disorders or depression. The French version of the AAQ-II presents good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.76-0.82). Its concurrent validity and construct validity appear strong. The questionnaire is reliable in test-retest evaluation. The one-factor structure of the French version of the AAQ-II reproduces the structure of the original version. These results ensure the use of the French version of the AAQ-II in research as well as in clinical practice.]
AAQ-II translated in Japanese.
Naoko Kishita, Tetsuya Yamamoto, & Hironori Shimada
Author contact information:
Naoko Kishita
Graduate School of Human Sciences,
Waseda University, Japan
sun_village@suou.waseda.jp
Translated AAQ-II in Norwegian.
Norsk konsensusversjon (backtranslated), mars 2009. Forhåpentligvis vil det gjøres en valideringsstudie av den i nærmeste fremtid. Denne versjonen er utarbeidet av (i alfabetisk rekkefølge):
Roar Fosse PhD
Børge Holden dr.philos.
Didrik Heggdal Psykologspesialist
Steffen Holthe Psykolog
Trym Nordstrand Jacobsen Cand.Psyk.
Ayna B. Johansen PhD
Lars Mariero Med.Stud.
(for spørsmål kan Trym Nordstrand Jacobsen nåes på trym_n_jacobsen@yahoo.no)
AAQ-II translated in Portuguese.
Here is an article describing the development of the AAQ-II developed by researchers in Mexico. At the end of the article is the measure.
AAQ-II translated in Swedish by JoAnne Dahl.
German 22-item AAQ.
This German version of the AAQ was used in an upcoming study by these authors
The 22 item version (the one you can score all vaidated ways) of the AAQ-I in Swedish.
Translated by Rikard Calmbro and Henrik Torneskog. The translators can be reached at calmbro@hotmail.com.
The Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire (ATQ; Hollon & Kendall, 1980). The ATQ measures depressogenic thought frequency. This measure is commonly used in depression studies examining the impact of cognitive therapy. However, the ATQ-B is a revision to this measure by Jacobson and colleagues (ATQ-B, Addis & Jacobson, 1996) aimed at assessing the believability of these depressive thoughts if they occur and it has been used as a proxy measure for defusion in the ACT community. We recommend that you use both subscales; the ATQ-F for frequency of automatic/depressive thoughts and the ATQ-B for believability of (or fusion with) these thoughts.
Scoring for the measure is typically a simple sum score for the F sub scale and the B sub scale. The F and B scores can be used in analyses as separate entities and have been shown to be differentially related to outcomes (e.g., frequency of thoughts was not reduced at post treatment but believability of them was reduced) in studies of depression using behavioral interventions.
Reference: Zettle, R. D. & Hayes, S. C. (1986). Dysfunctional control by client verbal behavior: The context
of reason giving. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 4, 30 38.
This page includes behavioral measures used in laboratory-based studies.
The Center for Addictions, Personality, and Emotion Research has several computerized behavioral measures available for download including the PASAT-C (a distressing math task) and the mirror tracing task. You can access these programs by clicking here.
This page contains a working list of child and adolescent specific measures related to ACT processes.
The AFQ was derived from an initial pool of 50 items developed to measure psychological acceptance, conceptualized as an active and multidimensional process involving high or low levels of: willingness to experience private events, values-oriented action, experiential avoidance, and cognitive and emotional fusion. Results of exploratory factor analysis on these initial 50 items supported a three-factor solution. Factor one consisted of 25 items, all negatively worded. Conceptually, this factor seems to tap into experiential avoidance and fusion and is now the Avoidance and Fusion Questionnaire for Youth (AFQ-Y).
We have used the AFQ with children and adolescents 9-17 years old. Based on results from school studies in middle Tennessee, children report good comprehension of items. The AFQ seems to be a stronger predictor of negative outcomes such as physical and emotional symptoms.
The Children's Acceptance and Mindfulness Measure (CAMM; Greco, Smith, & Baer, 2009) is a 10-item measure of acceptance and mindfulness for youth.
Manuscript currently in progress.
For more information, contact Laurie Greco.
"Authors: L. A. Greco & Hart
The Diabetes Acceptance and Action Scale for Children and Adolescents is a 42-item measure that is being used to indicate levels of psychological flexibility in youth with Type 1 diabetes.
Scoring: To score the DAAS, first reverse score negatively worded items (see below), then sum all items. Higher scores on the DAAS should reflect higher levels of diabetes-related acceptance and action.
Reverse score key: 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42.
The authors are still in the process of collecting data. Preliminary data obtained thus far reveals statistically significant correlations:
Diabetes-related quality of life = .36 (higher acceptance correlates with higher Quality of Life)
Diabetes-related worry = -.41
Social anxiety = -.36
Adherence to medical regimen = .30"
Information quoted from Ciarrochi, J. & Bilich, L. (2006). Process measures of potential relevance to ACT. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wollongong, Australia.
The Parental Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (PAAQ) is a specific AAQ measure designed to assess experiential avoidance in the context of parenting.
Reference:
Cheron, D.M., Ehrenreich, J.T. & Pincus, D.B. (In Press). Assessment of parental experiential avoidance in a clinical sample of children with anxiety disorders. Child Psychiatry and Human Development.
The Avoidance and Fusion Questionnaire for Youth (AFQ-Y; Greco, Murrell, & Coyne, 2005) is a 17-item measure that asks respondents to rate how true each item is for them (0 = Not at All True; 4 = Very True). Items are tied to ACT’s model of human suffering and were generated to represent a theoretically cohesive conceptualization of psychological inflexibility fostered by: (1) Cognitive fusion (e.g., “My thoughts and feelings mess up my life,” “The bad things I think about myself must be true”); (2) Experiential avoidance (e.g., “I push away thoughts and feelings that I don’t like”); and (3) Inaction or behavioral ineffectiveness in the presence of unwanted internal experiences (e.g., “I can’t be a good friend when I feel upset”).
Consistent with the theory underlying acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), items converged into a 17-item scale (AFQ-Y) and an 8-item short form (AFQ-Y8). Results of classical test theory, factor analysis, and item response theory support the psychometric properties of the 17-item version of the AFQ-Y and AFQ-Y8. Overall, research suggests that the AFQ-Y may be a useful and child-friendly measure of core ACT processes.
Reference
Greco, L. A., Lambert, W., & Baer, R. A. (2008). Psychological inflexibility in childhood and adolescence: Development and evaluation of the Avoidance and Fusion Questionnaire for Youth. Psychological Assessment. 20(2), 93-102.
In this page I have uploaded a series of computerized measures that I have written in Visual Basic for Applications and used in a few studies. One of these measures, the Deictic Relational Task is a deictic framing measure that captures both deictic accuracy and fluency. We have been developing this measure over the last years with Michael Levin, Steven C. Hayes, Colin Stromberg and others.
There are many advantages to use Microsoft PowerPoint to write your computerized questionnaires and tasks. First of all, it is a highly disseminated software that I think most of you have. Secondly, it can potentially reduce acquiescence bias since you can change the background and format of each measure and you will be more likely to keep the participant's attention throughout.
The code of these slides (which you can find if you add the developer tab under options and click "visual basic") is freely available for modification and improvement as long as your intent is to benefit your clients, research and/or for enhancing the work of other scientist practitioners and researchers. Please, feel free to contact me if you find ways to improve the visual basic code or for questions about it. If you have questions about how to score the Deictic Relational Task or about how to compile all the measures together in a single PowerPoint document, let me know as well.
Note: make sure you enable macro before you try the measure (ex: Powerpoint Options/Trust Center/Trust Center Settings/Macro Settings/Enable all macros).
There are many measures of ACT concepts that have been developed for specific disorders, syndromes, and types of chronic disease.
Diabetes specific AAQ
Epilepsy specific AAQ
Acceptance and Action Questionnaire for Weight-Related Difficulties. The scale and additional information (scoring instructions and a brief summary of psychometric properties) are attached below.
Reference:
Lillis, J., & Hayes, S.C. (2008). Measuring avoidance and inflexibility in weight related problems. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 4(4), 348-354.
Contact Jason Lillis for further information.
The Avoidance and Inflexibility Scale (AIS) assesses ACT processes in the context of cigarette smoking.
Reference:
Gifford, E. V., Antonuccio, D.O, Kohlenberg, B.S., Hayes, S.C., & Piasecki, M.M. (2002). Combining Bupropion SR with acceptance and commitment-based behavioral therapy for smoking cessation: Preliminary results from a randomized controlled trial. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Advancement of Behavioral Therapy, Reno, NV.
Sandoz, E. K., Wilson, K. G., & Merwin, R. M. (Under Revision). Assessment of Body Image Flexibility: The Body Image - Acceptance and Action Questionnaire.
Sandoz, E. K. (2010). Assessment of Body Image Flexibility: An Evaluation The Body Image - Acceptance and Action Questionnaire. Unpublished dissertation. University of Mississippi.
Body image disturbance is when an individual’s experience of the physical self becomes problematic because of its inaccuracy, associated distress, and/or disruption of other areas of functioning. Emerging treatments for body image disturbance target the rigidity of cognitive and behavioral patterns, teaching individuals to become more open to and flexible with the experience. To evaluate this model of body image disturbance, it will be important to demonstrate not only positive outcomes, but the processes that account for these outcomes. Three studies were conducted in an attempt to develop a psychometrically sound measure of body image flexibility, the Body Image - Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (BI-AAQ). Study one focused on the generation and reduction of items for the BI-AAQ and a demonstration of its concurrent validity. Body image flexibility was shown to be associated with overall psychological flexibility, body image dissatisfaction, disordered eating, and other psychological and social difficulties. Study two demonstrated adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability of BI-AAQ. Study three replicated and extended the findings with respect to concurrent validity. Research and clinical utility of the BI-AAQ are discussed along with theoretical and treatment implications of the findings.
The BI-AAQ is linked below in .pdf format below and is downloadable for members. All items are reverse-scored to yield a score for body image acceptance.
Also linked below is a modified version of the BI-AAQ that does not refer specifically to weight and shape.
Finally, my complete dissertation manuscript which included all three psychometric studies is below. (I will replace this with the article manuscript as soon as it is updated.
Contact Emily Sandoz with questions, comments, or requests for the working manuscript: eksandoz@olemiss.edu
Chronic Pain version of the AAQ
Tinnitus specific AAQ.
Reference:
Westin, V., Hayes, S. C., & Andersson, G. (2008). Is it the sound or your relationship to it? The role of acceptance in predicting tinnitus impact. Behaviour Research and Therapy.
The Voices Acceptance and Action Questionnaire.
Reference: Shawyer, F., Ratcliff, K., Mackinnon, A., Farhall, J., Hayes, S.C. & Copolov, D. (2007). The voices acceptance and action scale (VAAS): Pilot data. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63(6), 593–606.
Partial list of fusion measures.
Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire - believability subscale.
See the ATQ page on this site for more information.
In the United Kingdom, ACT researchers and clinicians have been collaborating on a general measure of fusion with thoughts. This has now been tested in three samples with a combined n of over 600. Access the attached PowerPoint presentation from Enschede for further information and background. You can also download the 13 and 28 item versions of the questionaire here.
CFQ Developers:
Maria Dempster, NHS Grampian
Helen Bolderston, Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
David Gillanders, University of Edinburgh
Frank Bond, Goldsmiths, University of London
The CFQ13 looks as though these are the best performing items, though this measure is still in development. Individuals interested in using this measure and adding to its evaluation are advised to continue to use the 28 item version, untill further studies confirm the CFQ13.
To collaborate with us do contact:
Helen Bolderston: helen.bolderston@dhft.nhs.uk
David Gillanders: david.gillanders@ed.ac.uk
Assesses believability of negative thoughts towards clients.
Reference: Hayes, S. C., Bissett, R., Roget, N., Padilla, M., Kohlenberg, B. S., Fisher, G., Masuda, A., Pistorello, J., Rye, A. K., Berry, K. & Niccolls, R. (2004). The impact of acceptance and commitment training and multicultural training on the stigmatizing attitudes and professional burnout of substance abuse counselors. Behavior Therapy, 35, 821-835.
Partial list of available mindfulness measures.
The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire is a 39 item measure consisting of five subscales (observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging of inner experience, and non-reactivity to inner experience).
Reference:
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27-45.
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., et al. (2008). Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples. Assessment, 15, 329-342.
The scale and measure development article are included below.
The Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) is a 15 item measure assessing mindfulness of moment to moment experience.
Reference:
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822-848.
The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale is a 20 item measure consisting of 2 sub-scales (acceptance and present moment awareness).
Reference:
Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008). The assessment of present-moment awareness and acceptance: The Philadelphia mindfulness scale. Assessment, 15, 204-223.
This page is a working list of other measures related to ACT processes.
Reference: Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 267-283.
Description from abstract of original paper:
"We developed a multidimensional coping inventory to assess the different ways in which people respond to stress. Five scales (of four items each) measure conceptually distinct aspects of problem-focused coping (active coping, planning, suppression of competing activities, restraint coping, seeking of instrumental social support); five scales measure aspects of what might be viewed as emotion-focused coping (seeking of emotional social support, positive reinterpretation, acceptance, denial, turning to religion); and three scales measure coping responses that arguably are less useful (focus on and venting of emotions, behavioral disengagement, mental disengagement). Study 1 reports the development of scale items. Study 2 reports correlations between the various coping scales and several theoretically relevant personality measures in an effort to provide preliminary information about the inventory's convergent and discriminant validity. Study 3 uses the inventory to assess coping responses among a group of undergraduates who were attempting to cope with a specific stressful episode. This study also allowed an initial examination of associations between dispositional and situational coping tendencies."
The EQ is a 20 item self-report scale designed to measure decentering and rumination.
Reference:
Fresco, D. M., Moore, M. T., van Dulmen, M., Segal, Z. V., Teasdale, J. D., Ma, H., & Williams, J. M. G. (2007). Initial psychometric properties of the Experiences Questionnaire: Validation of a self-report measure of decentering. Behavior Therapy, 38, 234-246.
Please contact David Fresco (fresco@kent.edu) if you would like to receive a copy of the measure.
Internalized Shame Scale.
Reference:
Rosario, P.M. & White, R.M. (2006). The Internalized Shame Scale: Temporal stability, internal consistency, and principal components analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 95–103.
The Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS) assesses both avoidance of pain and cognitive fusion with pain.
Reference:
Wicksell, R. K., Renöfält, J., Olsson, G. L., Bond, F.W. & Melin, L. (2008). Avoidance and cognitive fusion - central components in pain related disability? Development and preliminary validation of the Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS). European Journal of Pain, 12, 491-500.
Scale for personality rigidity.
Reference: Rehfisch, J.M. (1958). A scale for personality rigidity. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 22, 11-15.
This scale has been found to relate to rule governed behavior in laboratory studies.
Wulfert, E., Greenway, D. E., Farkas, P., Hayes, S. C., & Dougher, M. J. (1994). Correlation between a personality test for rigidity and rule-governed insensitivity to operant contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 659-671.
From abstract:
"Adults were selected on the basis of their scores on the Scale for Personality Rigidity (Rehfisch, 1958). Their scores served as a measure of hypothesized rule governance in the natural environment. Experiment 1 studied the effects of accurate versus minimal instructions and high versus low rigitidy on performance on a multiple differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) 4-s fixed-ratio (FR) 18 schedule. When the schedule was switched to extinction, accurate instructions and high rigidity were associated with greater perseveration in the response pattern subjects developed during the reinforcement phase. In Experiment 2, the effects of rigidity and of accurate versus inaccurate instructions were studied. Initially, all subjects received accurate instructions about an FR schedule. The schedule was then switched to DRL, but only half of the subjects received instructions about the DRL contingency, and the other half received FR instructions as before. Accurate instructions minimized individual differences because both high and low scorers on the rigidity scale earned points in DRL. However, when inaccurate instructions were provided, all high-rigidity subjects follow them although they did not earn points on the schedule, whereas most low-rigidity subjects abandoned them and responded appropriately to DRL. The experiments demonstrate a correlation between performances observed in the human operant laboratory and a paper-and-pencil test of rigidity that purportedly reflects important response styles that differentiate individuals in the natural environment. Implications for applied research and intervention are discussed."
Reference:
Neff, K. D. (2003). Development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2, 223-250.
Coding Key:
Self-Kindness Items: 5, 12, 19, 23, 26
Self-Judgment Items: 1, 8, 11, 16, 21
Common Humanity Items: 3, 7, 10, 15
Isolation Items: 4, 13, 18, 25
Mindfulness Items: 9, 14, 17, 22
Over-identified Items: 2, 6, 20, 24
Subscale scores are computed by calculating the mean of subscale item responses. To compute a total self-compassion score, reverse score the negative subscale items - self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification - then compute a total mean.
(This method of calculating the total score is slightly different than that used in the article referenced above, in which each subscale was added together. However, I find it is easier to interpret the scores if the total mean is used.)
The Thought Control Questionnaire assesses different methods used to control unwanted/aversive thoughts. The measure can be downloaded here.
Reference:
Wells, A., & Davies, M. I. (1994). The thought control questionnaire: A measure of individual differences in the control of unwanted thoughts. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 32, 871–878.
"Authors: R. Michael Bagby, James D. A. Parker and Graeme J. Taylor
The TAS is a 20-item instrument that is one of the most commonly used measures of alexithymia. Alexithymia refers to people who have trouble identifying and describing emotions and who tend to minimise emotional experience and focus attention externally.
The TAS-20 has 3 subscales:
• Difficulty Describing Feelings subscale is used to measure difficulty describing emotions. 5 items – 2, 4, 7, 12, 17.
• Difficulty Identifying Feeling subscale is used to measure difficulty identifying emotions. 7 items – 1, 3, 6, 11, 9, 13, 14.
• Externally-Oriented Thinking subscale is used to measure the tendency of individuals to focus their attention externally. 8 items – 5, 8, 10, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20.
Scoring: The TAS-20 is a self-report scale that is comprised of 20 items. Items are rated using a 5-point Likert scale whereby 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. There are 5 items that are negatively keyed (items 4, 5, 10, 18 and 19). The total alexithymia score is the sum of responses to all 20 items, while the score for each subscale factor is the sum of the responses to that subscale.
The TAS-20 uses cutoff scoring: equal to or less than 51 = non-alexithymia, equal to or greater than 61 = alexithymia. Scores of 52 to 60 = possible alexithymia.
Reliability: Demonstrates good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = .81) and test-retest reliability (.77, p<.01).
Validity: Research using the TAS-20 demonstrates adequate levels of convergent and concurrent validity. The 3 factor structure was found to be theoretically congruent with the alexithymia construct. In addition, it has been found to be stable and replicable across clinical and nonclinical populations.
Reference:
Bagby, R. M., Parker, J. D. A. & Taylor, G. J. (1994). The twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale-I. Item selection and cross-validation of the factor structure. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 38, 23-32."
Information quoted from Ciarrochi, J. & Bilich, L. (2006). Process measures of potential relevance to ACT. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wollongong, Australia.
"Authors: Daniel M. Wegner & Sophia Zanakos
The WBSI is a 15-item questionnaire that is designed to measure thought suppression. Chronic thoughts suppression is a variable that is related to obsessive thinking and negative affect associated with depression and anxiety. The WBSI can help to identify individuals who are more prone to develop chronic thought suppression as well as individuals who express wishing they were not depressed, but are in fact depressed. The measure can also be used by practitioners to evaluate changer over time.
Scoring: The scoring of the WBSI is based on a 5 point scale from Strongly disagree (1) to Strongly agree (5). The total score is obtained by summing up the responses that are provided by respondents. The total score can range from 15 to 75. Higher scores on the WBSI indicate greater tendencies to suppress thoughts.
Reliability: The WBSI has very good internal consistency, with alphas ranging from .87 to .89. The WBSI has also been found to have good stability with a 1 week test-retest correlation of .92, and a 3 week to 3 month test-retest correlation of .69.
Validity: Demonstrates excellent convergent validity with significant correlations between the WBSI and several measures including Beck’s Depression Inventory (BDI), the Maudsley Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). It has also been found that the WBSI correlates negatively with repression, thus suggesting that the WBSI measures a characteristic that is different to traditional concepts of repression.
Reference:
Wegner, D. M. & Zanakos, S. (1994). Chronic thought suppression. Journal of Personality, 62, 615-640."
Information quoted from Ciarrochi, J. & Bilich, L. (2006). Process measures of potential relevance to ACT. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wollongong, Australia.
Ciarrochi, J. & Bilich, L. (2006). Process measures of potential relevance to ACT. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wollongong, Australia.
This document contains a large collection of ACT-relevant measures
Attached, please find a copy of self-monitoring forms I use with a wide range of patients. I direct patients to monitor those self-care behaviors relevant to their treatment (hygiene, eating, going to sleep at reasonable hour, exercise, meditation/centering, alcohol use). There is ample room for adding other behaviors or to permit some journaling/notes. *I recently replaced the GIF formatted forms with forms converted to PDF format (using free PDF writer at www.gohtm.com).