@article{KemperLutzBaehretal.2012,
  author    = {Kemper, Christoph J. and Lutz, Johannes and B{\"a}hr, Tobias and R{\"u}ddel, Heinz and Hock, Michael},
  title     = {Construct validity of the anxiety sensitivity index-3 in clinical samples},
  series = {Assessment},
  volume    = {19},
  journal   = {Assessment},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {Thousand Oaks},
  issn      = {1073-1911},
  doi       = {10.1177/1073191111429389},
  pages     = {89 -- 100},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Using two clinical samples of patients, the presented studies examined the construct validity of the recently revised Anxiety Sensitivity Index-3 (ASI-3). Confirmatory factor analyses established a clear three-factor structure that corresponds to the postulated subdivision of the construct into correlated somatic, social, and cognitive components. Participants with different primary clinical diagnoses differed from each other on the ASI-3 subscales in theoretically meaningful ways. Specifically, the ASI-3 successfully discriminated patients with anxiety disorders from patients with nonanxiety disorders. Moreover, patients with panic disorder or agoraphobia manifested more somatic concerns than patients with other anxiety disorders and patients with nonanxiety disorders. Finally, correlations of the ASI-3 scales with other measures of clinical symptoms and negative affect substantiated convergent and discriminant validity. Substantial positive correlations were found between the ASI-3 Somatic Concerns and body vigilance, between Social Concerns and fear of negative evaluation and socially inhibited behavior, and between Cognitive Concerns and depression symptoms, anxiety, fear of negative evaluation, and subjective complaints. Moreover, Social Concerns correlated negatively with dominant and intrusive behavior. Results are discussed with respect to the contribution of the ASI-3 to the assessment of anxiety-related disorders.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HahnWeckWitthoeftetal.2021,
  author    = {Hahn, Daniela and Weck, Florian and Witth{\"o}ft, Michael and K{\"u}hne, Franziska},
  title     = {Assessment of counseling self-efficacy},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2021.780088},
  pages     = {10},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Background: Many authors regard counseling self-efficacy (CSE) as important in therapist development and training. The purpose of this study was to examine the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the German version of the Counselor Activity Self-Efficacy Scales-Revised (CASES-R). Method: The sample consisted of 670 German psychotherapy trainees, who completed an online survey. We examined the factor structure by applying exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to the instrument as a whole. Results: A bifactor-exploratory structural equation modeling model with one general and five specific factors provided the best fit to the data. Omega hierarchical coefficients indicated optimal reliability for the general factor, acceptable reliability for the Action Skills-Revised (AS-R) factor, and insufficient estimates for the remaining factors. The CASES-R scales yielded significant correlations with related measures, but also with therapeutic orientations. Conclusion: We found support for the reliability and validity of the German CASES-R. However, the subdomains (except AS-R) should be interpreted with caution, and we do not recommend the CASES-R for comparisons between psychotherapeutic orientations.},
  language  = {en}
}