「大學生注意力缺失/過動疾患反應評估量表」(CARE)初步中文化及因素結構效度研究

Chinese College ADHD Response Evaluation (CARE): A Preliminary Constructive Validity Study Based on Factor Analyses

本研究旨在將「大學生注意力缺失／過動疾患反應評估量表」（CollegeADHD Response Evaluation， CARE）進行中文化，進行初步的信效度研究，並以因素分析執行建構效度的結構探索與檢驗。首先遵循二階段翻譯步驟，翻譯過程中取得原作者Glutting 正式確認同意。預試階段以較小樣本進行再測信度與內部一致性信度檢驗，結果顯示中文化CARE具良好信度。大規模施測取得723名大學生以及276 名家長填答之資料，進行因素分析。以驗證性因素分析大學生自填的CARESRI，結果顯示以三因子（不注意、過動、衝動）模式適配度較佳，符合預期。然而家長填答的CARE-PRI結果與過去研究結論有諸多不符。此外，描述統計資料顯示，本地樣本各量表得分平均高於國外樣本常模。文末討論造成這些與國外研究發現不一致的可能原因，並據以提出未來中文化成人ADHD 量表的研究方向。

This study aims to translate College ADHD Response Evaluation (CARE) intoChinese， conduct preliminary analyses on reliability， and examine construct validity with a series of factor analyses. First， a two-step translation was completed with the back-translation approved by Professor Glutting， the original author of CARE. A small sample was then tested in order to preliminarily explore reliability (test-retest and internalconsistency). The findings indicated that the Chinese version CARE has fair reliability.Further construct validity examination was conducted with a relatively larger sample， which included 723 Taiwan college students and 276 parents. Findings on CARE-SRI (filled by students) confirmed the three-factor (inattention， hyperactivity，and impulsivity) model suggested by other CARE studies. However， findings on CARE-PRI (filled by parents) revealed a new model， which agreed with none of theknown models. Finally， according to the descriptive statistical data， our local sample scored higher than the original CARE norm. Possible reasons for the disagreement were discussed in order to shed light on future studies.