Scholarlink

Background <p>This study provides initial validity evidence for the Korean-adapted Process-Based Assessment Tool (PBAT) using a Boruta machine learning approach.</p> Methods <p>A community sample of Korean adults was employed (<i>N</i> = 1000; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 40.19, <i>SD</i> = 10.45). Item-level criterion validity was evaluated using the Boruta algorithm, which identified important PBAT items by comparing each item to randomized shadow variables across multiple iterations for outcomes (e.g., psychological distress, life satisfaction, and frustration). Temporal consistency was examined through test–retest reliability and within-person (ipsative) stability using Pearson correlations, D<sup>2</sup> indices, and Q-correlations using a subsample (<i>n</i> = 300) that completed a second PBAT 30&#xa0;days later.</p> Results <p>Negative selection items, such as difficulties expressing emotions (PB18), and negative variation items, such as feeling stuck (PB12), were among the strongest predictors of outcomes. Test–retest correlations demonstrated moderate to strong temporal stability; ipsative analyses revealed that most participants maintained stable profiles.</p> Conclusions <p>Overall, our findings support the PBAT as a culturally adaptable tool for tracking core psychological processes in interventions. The study’s limitations include a reliance on self-reporting, which can inflate shared method variance, and the Boruta algorithm’s inability to clarify causal pathways. Future studies should incorporate experimental or longitudinal designs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

From diagnostic criteria to change processes: validation of the Korean process-based assessment tool using a machine learning approach

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月3日

查看全文
  • Duckhyun Jo,
  • Sojeong Im,
  • Eunbi Lee,
  • Felicia Sundström,
  • Eunjoo Yang

摘要

Background

This study provides initial validity evidence for the Korean-adapted Process-Based Assessment Tool (PBAT) using a Boruta machine learning approach.

Methods

A community sample of Korean adults was employed (N = 1000; Mage = 40.19, SD = 10.45). Item-level criterion validity was evaluated using the Boruta algorithm, which identified important PBAT items by comparing each item to randomized shadow variables across multiple iterations for outcomes (e.g., psychological distress, life satisfaction, and frustration). Temporal consistency was examined through test–retest reliability and within-person (ipsative) stability using Pearson correlations, D2 indices, and Q-correlations using a subsample (n = 300) that completed a second PBAT 30 days later.

Results

Negative selection items, such as difficulties expressing emotions (PB18), and negative variation items, such as feeling stuck (PB12), were among the strongest predictors of outcomes. Test–retest correlations demonstrated moderate to strong temporal stability; ipsative analyses revealed that most participants maintained stable profiles.

Conclusions

Overall, our findings support the PBAT as a culturally adaptable tool for tracking core psychological processes in interventions. The study’s limitations include a reliance on self-reporting, which can inflate shared method variance, and the Boruta algorithm’s inability to clarify causal pathways. Future studies should incorporate experimental or longitudinal designs.