PAI-A 약물문제척도(DRG)의 변별타당도에 관한 연구

Abstract

ABSTRACT

A Study on the Discriminant Validity of the PAI-A(Adolescent Personality Assessment Inventory)-DRG(Drug Problems) Scale

Jeon Tae-Seon Advisor : Prof. Jung, Seung-Ah,Ph.D. Department of Counseling Psychology, Graduate School of Chosun University

Adolescent substance abuse problem has been raised as a social issue of grave concern. In the past, the teenager abusers were mostly limited to juvenile delinquents, but currently the numbers of abuser has been increased and the abuse problem itself generalized to ordinary students. So, accurate estimation of that matter including diverse drugs is necessarily required. However, the researches on the validity of (Korean version) Adolescent Personality Assessment Inventory(PAI-A) and Drug Problems Scale(DRG) are not quite satisfactory. This thesis was conducted to explore the diagnosis of the adolescent substance abuse matters and the diagnostic functions of DRG, to verify its utility to the criminal justice outcomes and youth counseling session in S. Korea. For that subject, it executed the test of the accuracy on diagnostic classification through DRG by Discriminant Analysis on the separated substance abusing, non-abusing group among the ordinary youth and juvenile delinquents. By Item Analysis it searched for the questions which affect to validity in substance. The consequences and the discussions of this research to confirm the practical implications of clinical setting and the clinical validity on DRG of PAI-A are as follows. First, as a result of Item Analysis, the questionnaire of PAI-A comprises partial questions which make substance abusing youth confused to answer precisely and not properly reflects the realities of substance abuse problem. Second, inner-item consistency(Cronbach's α) of DRG was calculated at .58 which figure means to be below the average. It was less than the inner-item consistency of PAI-A(middle school students : .69, high school ; .77, Juvenile delinquent ; .76). Third, Discriminant Analysis by DRG reveal the hit ratio of each groups were 59.8%(ordinary youth), 54.2%(non-drug abusing youth of juvenile delinquents), 64.3%(juvenile delinquents), and total classification-prediction rate was 59.43%. In conclusion, the result of the research into the explanation and predication of DRG of PAI-A testified that it is desirable when versatile practice based on the clinicians expert experience and the other products of research on adolescent substance abuse problem performed. Especially, DRG of PAI-A defined its purpose to examine substance abused behaviors, not for the direct diagnosis. Since its discriminant validity of particular diagnosis has not been verified, prudent inquiry in practice and its interpretation is required. In addition, there were several limitations to search in this thesis, and suggestions to further study over extensive subjects.