Cognitive Distortion (Liou, 2024)
- Populations: Male Middle and Late Adolescents and adults with Intellectual Disability.
- Age ranges: 15-20
- Languages: Not reported, partly Pictoral
- Countries: Taiwan
Items
Subscales
- Rationalization, 6 Items
- Denial, 6 Items
- Victim Blaming, 6 Items
Items
Items are not reported.
Responses
Items used a 4 point Likert-type scale, 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, and 4 = strongly agree.
Scoring
“Thus, the higher the score, the greater the cognitive distortion associated with sexually offensive behavior.” (Liou, 2024)
Citations
Wen-Ying Liou (2024) Two pictorial tools for assessing the attitudes of Taiwanese male high school students with intellectual disabilities toward sexually offensive behavior, International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 70:4, 711-718, DOI:10.1080/20473869.2022.2140252
Team comments
This measure was developed alongside the Victim Empathy (Liou, 2024)
Scoring breakdown
Measure development
- Significant design input from young people
- Cognitive interviews with young people
- Expert input
Validity
- Unknown: Face validity
- Unknown: Convergent validity
- Green: Construct validity
Reliability
- Green: Internal consistency
- Unknown: Test-retest
Ease of use
- Unknown: Readability
Definitions
Face validity: How well a measure appears to represent the construct it is supposed to be measuring.
Convergent validity: How well a measure correlates with other hypothetically-related measures.
Construct validity: The extent to which a measure reflects the construct it was designed to evaluate.
Internal consistency: The extent to which items in a scale capture aspects of the same construct.
Test-retest: The degree to which measurement scores are consistent over a short period of time (usually 2 weeks).
Readability: The ease with which a reader can understand the questionnaire items.
Key
- Green: Meets validation criteria
- Red: Does not meet validation criteria
- Unknown: Evidence not available
