In my early factor studies on the ASI, I concluded that there is a single factor so large that identifying other factors, though possible, would likely have no practical significance. I understand that the ASI-3 which creates multiple factors is correlated at about .84 to the original ASI. It is hard for me understand how the original publication on the ASI-3 managed to get published without reporting a correlation when a key issue was to differentiate it from ASI.
I recall being at a symposium at ABCT a number of years ago when the ASI-3 was being introduced. Brett Deacon was giving a talk on the psychometric properties of the ASI-3 and someone in the audience who identified themselves as one of the originators of the ASI (perhaps you?) asked him a number of questions including about the correlation to the ASI. My recollection was that he said the correlation was in the mid-.90s. Obviously above .9 is not showing much variation for a total score. Why not email Brett Deacon or Bunmi Olantuji to see if they will share the number?
Hi Chad, I wrote the ASI in 1984. The ASI-3 is very highly correlated but I don't know the exact number. I don't understand why it wasn't reported in the original article.
Steven
Dear Dr Reiss
I have seen your ASI but i think maybe this papers can help you:
Taylor S, Zvolensky MJ, Cox BJ, Deacon B, Heimberg RG, Ledley DR, et al. Robust dimensions of anxiety sensitivity: development and initial validation of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index-3. Psychol Assess 2007;19: 176-188
Asmundson GJ, Weeks JW, Nicholas Carleton R, Thibodeau MA, Fetzner MG. Revisiting the latent structure of the anxiety sensitivity construct: more evidence of dimensionality. J Anxiety Disord 2011;25: 138-147
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Physiology
- Physiological Processes
- Stress