摘要
比较心理教育量表(Psycho-educational Profile,PEP)内地修订的普通话简体中文版(C-PEP-3)与香港粤语繁体中文版(PEP-3)差异,文章采用文献法和比较法,客观分析二者在修订背景、量表结构内容、记分、信效度等测量性能诸多方面的差异与特点。二者经过不同文化调整后,都是具有良好信、效度的评估工具。相比较,C-PEP-3结构更简洁、独立,测验难度更适合我国儿童认知发展水平,且常模具有普遍适用性。内地在应用PEP-3时,需考虑文化的适宜性和常模比较的适用性;建议两地宜单独使用各自的评估工具;PEP-3普通话版修订需扩大全国常模取样,以适应内地广阔的人文地域差异。
Objective:To compare the differences between mandarin&simplified Chinese version of PEP revised in mainland(C-PEP-3)and Cantonese&traditional version of PEP-3 of Hong Kong(PEP-3).Methods:The differences,merits and limitations of both two Chinese version of PEP were objectively analyzed using methods of literature review and comparison.Results:Both were good in reliability and validity,however,C-PEP3 was brief in content and independent of dimension structure,its difficulty and norms were adaptive to the level of cognition for mainland children.Conclusion:It is necessary to consider the cultural concern and norm appropriateness when using PEP-3 in mainland.Recommendations are as follows:C-PEP-3 and PEP-3 should be applied separately in its own cultural context;while updating PEP-3,it needs to extend normative groups to meet the cultural and geographic diversity in mainland.
作者
于松梅
YU Songmei(School of Education,Liaoning Normal University,Dalian,Liaoning 116029)
出处
《绥化学院学报》
2021年第10期125-129,共5页
Journal of Suihua University
关键词
孤独症谱系障碍
心理教育量表中文版
循证比较
autism spectrum disorder
Chinese version of Psycho-educational Profile
evidence-based comparison
