Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.761924
Title: Validating the Narrative Recovery Style Scale (NRSS) in a sample of individuals with serious mental illness
Author: Fraser, Gillian W.
ISNI:       0000 0004 7654 2017
Awarding Body: University of Glasgow
Current Institution: University of Glasgow
Date of Award: 2018
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Background: A critique of the traditional two-factor model of recovery style suggests that it does not fully take into account the range of strategies people use in their recovery. A third style of ‘ruminative preoccupation’ is proposed in addition to the existing styles of ‘integration’ and ‘sealing over’. In addition, current tools used to measure recovery style lack construct validity and have limitations such as being outdated or using a simplistic format. The Narrative Recovery Style Scale (NRSS) is a novel method of evaluating recovery style, using interview transcripts to provide a three-dimensional measurement of an individual’s style. Aim: The primary aim of this study was to validate and examine the psychometric properties of the NRSS in a mixed clinical sample of individuals with serious mental illness. Method: 36 participants with either schizophrenia (n=13), bipolar disorder (n=9), or complex trauma (n=14) were recruited to the study from community mental health services in Glasgow. Participants were interviewed using the Narrative Interview for Compassion-Revised (NCS-R), a recorded semi-structured interview designed to measure participants’ experiences of compassion towards the self, from self to others and from others to self. This was transcribed and the NRSS was applied to the narrative in order to obtain recovery style ratings. We examined the relationship between the NRSS and the Recovery Style Questionnaire (RSQ), the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) and the Psychosis Attachment Measure (PAM). Results: No associations were found between the NRSS subscales and the RSQ, the CISS, or the PAM. Regarding the internal structure of the scale, the integration subscale was found to be negatively correlated with the sealing over subscale. No relationship was found between the other subscales. Regarding the characteristics of the sample, a number of significant differences between the diagnostic groups were noted including age, IQ, occupation, attachment avoidance, coping, and RSQ recovery style. Conclusions: Although the results do not support the validity of the NRSS as a three-dimensional measure of recovery style, there are various methodological factors which may have influenced the study results. We recommend the development of a specifically constructed interview designed to activate recovery style, upon which the NRSS can be more reliably applied. A re-examination of the NRSS scoring strategy may also increase the research utility and strengthen the reliability of the measure.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (D.Clin.Psy.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.761924  DOI: Not available
Keywords: BF Psychology
Share: