Spanish version of the Metacognition Self-Assessment Scale (MSAS) for adults
Background:Although there are other tools in the Spanish language for assessing metacognition, there is no other that is as quick, simple and multidimensional as the Metacognition Self-Assessment Scale (MSAS). Objectives:Adapt and validate the MSAS to Spanish. Method:The sample consisted of 973 volu...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2023 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Murcia |
| Repositorio: | DIGITUM. Depósito Digital Institucional de la Universidad de Murcia |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:digitum.um.es:10201/133565 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.537351 http://hdl.handle.net/10201/133565 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Metacognition MSAS Metacognición Evaluación psicológica CDU::1 - Filosofía y psicología::159.9 - Psicología |
| Sumario: | Background:Although there are other tools in the Spanish language for assessing metacognition, there is no other that is as quick, simple and multidimensional as the Metacognition Self-Assessment Scale (MSAS). Objectives:Adapt and validate the MSAS to Spanish. Method:The sample consisted of 973 volunteers, 68.3% women and mean age of 27.9 years (SD= 12.68). Results:The internal consistency of the Spanish adaptation was generally adequate with a total α = .830, and from α = .658 to .826 for the factors. The original four-factor structure (Self-Reflexivity, Critical Distance, Mastery and Understanding Other Minds) showed adequate fit indices. The evidence of concurrent criterion validity indices was not as expected. Indications of discriminant validity were the low Self-Reflexivity scores of participants with a psychopathological history (d = .222) or psychological treatment (d = .326); in Mastery by those under psychological treatment (d = .345) or medication (d = .482), and in Critical distance for medication (d = .419). Conclusion:The Spanish adaptation and validation of the MSAS seems adequate for assessing metacognition and its subcomponents in the general population, opening a wide field of clinical and research applications. |
|---|