Evaluation of the Reliability of the Turkish Version of Autism Spectrum Quotient for University Students

Abstract

Objective: Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are neurodevelopmental disorders characterized by impaired social interaction and restrictive/repetitive interests. Autistic traits are similar to symptoms in ASD, but are present at the sub threshold level. Autism Spectrum Questionnaire (AQ) is the only questionnaire that has been translated into Turkish to measure autistic traits. Although populations consisting of university students are used in the studies, the reliability coefficients of AQ in this population are insufficient. The aim of the study is to examine the reliability of AQ in university students.

Material and Methods: Undergraduate and graduate students aged between 18-30 were included in the study. AQ consists of 50 questions in total and is answered in four-point Likert type. In the study, the reliability of the questionnaire was examined by dichotomous scoring, which is the classical approach, and Likert scoring as an alternative. In order to assess reliability, alpha coefficient, Spearman-Brown coefficient, and item-total correlations were analyzed to examine the consistency of items with the total questionnaire.

Results: Seven hundred and sixty participants (438 women, mean age=21.08 years, SD=2.78 range [18-30]) were included in the study. The reliability of the dichotomically scored data were found to be low (α=0.589, rsb=0.580). For Likert scoring, alpha coefficient and Spearman-Brown coefficient were higher but not sufficient (α=0.678, rsb=0.642). Reliability coefficients reached an acceptable level (α=0.789, rsb=0.746) after the removal of 13 items with low coefficients in the item-total correlation analysis.

Conclusion: The study shows that AQ has insufficient validity in university students. An alternative to this is the revised questionnaire AQ-R, which is formed by excluding 13 items. In studies conducted with the participation of university students, AQ-R, which is designed for the target population and has an acceptable reliability level, can be used.

Keywords

• autistic traits
• autism spectrum quotient
• reliability

ÜNİVERSİTE ÖĞRENCİLERİNDE OTİZM SPEKTRUM ANKETİ TÜRKÇE FORMUNUN GÜVENİRLİĞİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Abstract

Amaç: Otizm spektrum bozuklukları (OSB) toplumsal etkileşimde bozulma ve buna ek olarak yineleyici hareketlerle karakterize nörogelişimsel bozukluklardır. Otistik özellikler, OSB’li bireylerdeki semptomlara benzer, fakat eşik altı düzeyde görülür. OSB’nin spektrum özelliğine benzer şekilde, otistik özellikler genel popülasyonda dağılım gösterir. Otistik özellikleri ölçmek için Türkçeye kazandırılan tek anket Otizm Spektrum Anketidir (OSA). Çalışmalarda üniversite öğrencilerinden oluşan popülasyonlar kullanılmakla beraber OSA’nın bu popülasyonda güvenirlik katsayıları yetersizdir. Çalışmanın amacı üniversite öğrencilerinde OSA’nın güvenirliğinin incelenmesidir.

Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmaya 18-30 yaş arası lisans ve yüksek lisans öğrencileri dahil edilmiştir. Anket katılımcılara sınıflarda yüz yüze, kâğıt üzerinde uygulanmıştır. OSA, toplam 50 sorudan oluşmaktadır ve dörtlü Likert tipte yanıtlanmaktadır. Çalışmada anketin güvenirliği klasik yaklaşım olan dikotomik puanlama ve buna alternatif olacak şekilde Likert puanlama ile incelenmiştir. Güvenirliğin değerlendirilmesi için alfa katsayısı, Spearman-Brown katsayısı ve maddelerin anketin tümü ile uyumunun irdelenmesi için madde-bütün korelasyonları incelenmiştir.

Bulgular: Yedi yüz altmış katılımcı (438 kadın, ortalama yaş=21,08 yıl, standart sapma [SS]=2,78 aralık [18-30]) çalışmaya dahil olmuştur. Dikotomik olarak puanlanan verilerin güvenirliği düşük bulunmuştur (α=0,589, rsb=0,580). Likert puanlama türünde alfa katsayısı ve Spearman-Brown katsayısı daha yüksek olmakla beraber yeterli değildir (α=0,678, rsb=0,642). Madde-bütün korelasyonu analizinde katsayıları düşük olan 13 maddenin çıkarılması ile güvenirlik katsayılarının kabul edilebilir düzeye ulaşmıştır (α=0,789, rsb=0,746).

Sonuç: Çalışmamızda, üniversite öğrencilerinde OSA’nın güvenirliğinin yetersiz olduğu gösterilmiştir. Buna alternatif olarak 13 maddenin dışlanması ile oluşan revize anket (OSA-R) önerilmiştir. Üniversite öğrencilerinin katılımı ile gerçekleştirilen çalışmalarda hedef popülasyona yönelik olarak düzenlenen ve güvenirliği kabul edilebilir düzeyde olan OSA-R kullanılabilir.

Keywords

• güvenirlik
• otistik özellikler
• otizm spektrum anketi

References

1. 1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Arlington. VA: American Psychiatric Association, 2013.
2. 2. Constantino JN, Todd RD. Autistic Traits in the General Population. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60(5):524-30.
3. 3. Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Skinner R, Martin J, Clubley E. The autism-spectrum quotient (AQ): evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. J Autism Dev Disord. 2001;31(1):5–17.
4. 4. Ruzich E, Allison C, Smith P, Watson P, Auyeung B, Ring H et al. Measuring autistic traits in the general population: a systematic review of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ) in a nonclinical population sample of 6,900 typical adult males and females. Mol Autism. 2015;6(2):1-12. Doi:10.1186/2040-2392-6-2.
5. 5. Aykan S, Kalaycıoğlu C. Sağlıklı bireylerde ve otizmde otistik belirtilerin sürekliliği. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası. 2017;70(1):1-4.
6. 6. Robinson EB, Koenen KC, McCormick MC, Munir K, Hallett V, Happé F et al. Evidence that autistic traits show the same etiology in the general population and at the quantitative extremes (5%, 2.5%, and 1%). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(11):1113. (Epub 2011 Nov 1).
7. 7. Constantino JN, Todd RD. Intergenerational transmission of subthreshold autistic traits in the general population. Biol Psychiatry. 2005;57(6):655-60.
8. 8. Hurley RSE, Losh M, Parlier M, Reznick JS, Piven J. The broad autism phenotype questionnaire. J Autism Dev Disord. 2007;37(9):1679-90.

9. 9. Donati MA, Berrocal C, Primi C, Petracchi G, Carpita B, Cosci F et al. Measuring subthreshold autistic traits in the general population: Psychometric properties of the Adult Autism Subthreshold Spectrum (AdAS Spectrum) scale. Psychiatry Res. 2019;281:112576. Doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112576 (Epub 2019 Sept 23).
10. 10. Köse S, Bora E, Erermiş S, Aydın C. Psychometric features of Turkish version of Autism-Spectrum Quotient. Anatol J Psychiatry. 2010;11:253–60.
11. 11. Ercan İ, Kan İ. Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Derg. 2004;30(3)211-6.
12. 12. Karakoç AGDFY, Dönmez PDL. Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında temel ilkeler. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası. 2014;40:39-49.
13. 13. GoogleScholar. Citation for “Psychometric features of Turkish version of autism-spectrum quotient” article. Erişim tarihi: 11 Eylül 2020: https://scholar.google.com.tr/scholar?oi=bibs&hl=en&cites=16641991846081822918&as_sdt=5
14. 14. Hergüner A, Hergüner S. Association between age at menarche and autistic traits in Turkish university students. Am J Hum Biol. 2016;28(1):44-7.
15. 15. Toy H, Hergüner A, Şimşek S, Hergüner S. Autistic traits in women with primary Dysmenorrhea: A case-control study. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016;12:2319-25.
16. 16. Aykan S, Nalçaci E. Assessing Theory of Mind by humor: The Humor comprehension and appreciation Test (ToM-HCAT). Front Psychol. 2018;9:1470. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01470 (Epub 2018 Aug 13).
17. 17. Aykan S, Vatansever G, Doğanay-Erdoğan B, Kalaycıoğlu C. Development of Sensory Sensitivity Scales (SeSS): Reliability and validity analyses. Res Dev Disabil. 2020;103612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2020.103612 (Epub 2020 Feb 21).
18. 18. Cronbach LJ, Meehl PE. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol Bull. 1955;52(4),281–302.
19. 19. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. New York. Oxford Medical Publications, 1995.
20. 20. Kline P. The handbook of psychological testing. 2nd ed. London. Routledge, 2013.
21. 21. Alpar R. Uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik. 4th ed. Ankara. Detay Yayincilik, 2016.
22. 22. Freeth M, Sheppard E, Ramachandran R, Milne E. A cross-cultural comparison of autistic traits in the UK, India and Malaysia. J Autism Dev Disord. 2013;43(11):2569-83.
23. 23. Austin EJ. Personality correlates of the broader autism phenotype as assessed by the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ). Pers Individ Dif. 2005;38(2):451-60.
24. 24. Stewart ME, Austin EJ. The structure of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from a student sample in Scotland. Pers Individ Dif. 2009;47(3):224-8.
25. 25. Hoekstra RA, Bartels M, Cath DC, Boomsma DI. Factor structure, reliability and criterion validity of the autism-spectrum quotient (AQ): A study in Dutch population and patient groups. J Autism Dev Disord. 2008;38(8):1555-66.
26. 26. Russell-Smith SN, Maybery MT, Bayliss DM. Relationships between autistic-like and schizotypy traits: An analysis using the Autism Spectrum Quotient and Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences. Pers Individ Dif. 2011;51(2): 128-32.
27. 27. Kloosterman PH, Keefer K V., Kelley EA, Summerfeldt LJ, Parker JDA. Evaluation of the factor structure of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient. Pers Individ Dif. 2011;50(2):310-314.
28. 28. Palmer CJ, Paton B, Enticott PG, Hohwy J. ‘Subtypes’ in the presentation of autistic traits in the general adult population. J Autism Dev Disord. 2015;45(5):1291-301
29. 29. Lundqvist LO, Lindner H. Is the Autism-spectrum quotient a valid measure of traits associated with the autism spectrum? a rasch validation in adults with and without autism spectrum disorders. J Autism Dev Disord. 2017;47:2080-91.
30. 30. English MCW, Gignac GE, Visser TAW, Whitehouse AJO, Maybery MT. A comprehensive psychometric analysis of autism-spectrum quotient factor models using two large samples: Model recommendations and the influence of divergent traits on total-scale scores. Autism Res. 2020;13:45-60.