Development and Preliminary Validation of the Threat Appraisal Questionnaire for Children (TAQ-C)

1Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Despite the emphasis on threat appraisal in cognitive models of anxiety, self-report measures of related processes in children and adolescents have been lacking. This paper reports on the development and preliminary psychometric evaluation of a new measure of threat appraisal for children and adolescents – the Threat Appraisal Questionnaire for Children (TAQ-C). Based on current conceptualisations of threat appraisal, the TAQ-C was designed to index the construct across three dimensions: probability, cost, and coping difficulties. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to examine this structure in a community sample of n = 312 children (ages 9–15 years, 55% female). Results indicated that the scores on the instrument capture three factors (Probability, Cost and Coping difficulties). Moreover, a model in which the 1st-order factors loaded significantly on a single 2nd order factor of threat in general, was supported. The TAQ-C was found to demonstrate good internal consistency, and acceptable levels of test-retest reliability within a 3–4 week interval, when evaluated with a subsample of n = 51 children. Support for convergent validity was demonstrated, with TAQ-C scores found to correlate strongly with existing measures of child anxiety, and conceptually related cognitive processes. Divergent validity was also evidenced, with low correlations found between TAQ-C scores and the unrelated construct measure of Hyperactivity-Inattention. The TAQ-C, therefore, appears to be a promising measure with a range of potential applications for child and adolescent settings.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Francis, R., Hawes, D. J., Abbott, M., & Costa, D. S. J. (2017). Development and Preliminary Validation of the Threat Appraisal Questionnaire for Children (TAQ-C). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 39(2), 322–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-016-9584-4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free