21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development and validation of a self-report measure of epistemic trust

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Epistemic trust (ET) refers to trust in communicated knowledge. This paper describes the development and validation of a new self-report questionnaire, the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ). We report on two studies (Study 1, n = 500; Study 2, n = 705) examining the psychometric properties of the ETMCQ and the relationship between EMTCQ scores (i.e., an individual’s epistemic stance) and exposure to adverse childhood experiences, mental health symptoms, attachment, mentalizing and general self-efficacy. The factor structure of the ETMCQ was examined using Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses, and its reliability and test-retest reliability were tested. Both studies yielded three correlated yet distinct factors–Trust, Mistrust and Credulity–and confirmed the reliability and validity of the ETMCQ. Preregistered hypotheses were confirmed and replicated across both studies. Main findings suggest intriguing links between the ETMCQ and developmental psychopathology constructs and are consistent with thinking on the role of epistemic stance in undermining adaptation and increasing the developmental risk of mental health problems. Mistrust and Credulity scores were associated with childhood adversity and higher scores on the global psychopathology severity index and both factors partially mediated the link between early adversity and mental health symptoms. Mistrust and Credulity were positively associated with difficulties in understanding mental states and insecure attachment styles. Post-hoc analysis identified that different attachment styles were associated with differences in epistemic stance. In addition, Trust was not associated with reduced levels of mental health symptoms and did not moderate the impact of childhood adversity–findings are congruent with the suggestion that the reduction of mistrust and credulity may be crucial common factors in promoting resilience and the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic interventions. This investigation and the ETMCQ provide an empirical measure of what until now has been largely a theoretical concept and open new avenues for future research.

          Related collections

          Most cited references81

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ValidationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisition
                Role: Project administration
                Role: Conceptualization
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                16 April 2021
                2021
                : 16
                : 4
                : e0250264
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ] Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, United Kingdom
                [3 ] Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
                Medical University of Vienna, AUSTRIA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0592-9949
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7077-8729
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9552-5755
                Article
                PONE-D-20-35001
                10.1371/journal.pone.0250264
                8051785
                33861805
                6d36c025-5df9-4079-98a1-b08e55ecd825
                © 2021 Campbell et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 8 November 2020
                : 3 April 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 4, Pages: 21
                Funding
                Funded by: BA/Leverhulme Small Research Grants
                Award ID: SRG1920\101398
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) North Thames at Barts Health NHS Trust
                Award Recipient :
                This research was funded by the British Academy as part of the BA/Leverhulme Small Research Grants SRG2019-20 Round scheme, reference: SRG1920\101398. Peter Fonagy is in part supported by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) North Thames at Barts Health NHS Trust. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Child Psychiatry
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Mathematical and Statistical Techniques
                Statistical Methods
                Factor Analysis
                Physical Sciences
                Mathematics
                Statistics
                Statistical Methods
                Factor Analysis
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Survey Research
                Questionnaires
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Communications
                Social Communication
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognitive Psychology
                Learning
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Learning
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Learning
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Learning and Memory
                Learning
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Psychometrics
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Psychometrics
                Custom metadata
                Anonymized data supporting the findings in this study are available in the Supporting information files, with the exception of demographic information. Demographic information cannot be shared publicly as it constitutes sensitive personal information. Researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data should approach the UCL ethics committee to request access on ethics@ 123456ucl.ac.uk .

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content260

                Cited by51

                Most referenced authors980