ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Measuring self-as-context in Chinese college students: Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of self-as-context scale (C-SACS).
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychological mechanism of acceptance and commitment therapy and rational emotive behavior therapy for treating hoarding: Evidence from randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in public health · 2023Trial
- Psychometric Properties of the Self-as-Context Scale with a University Counseling Center Sample.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Acceptance as a possible link between past psychedelic experiences and psychological flexibility.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Social Support, Coping Strategies, Depression, Anxiety, and Cognitive Function Among People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Path Analysis.Psychiatry investigation · 2024Article
- Measurement of psychological inflexibility: an examination of the psychometric properties of the AAQ-3 compared to AAQ-II.BMC psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To examine the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Self-as-Context Scale (SACS) in college students. Method: We used convenience sampling to recruit 708 Chinese college students. All participants completed the SACS and 343 of them were asked to complete the validation questionnaires (Satisfaction with Life Scale, Peace of Mind Scale, Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II, Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire-Fusion, and Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21) at the same time. We conducted items analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), measurement invariance test, correlation analysis, regression analysis, and internal consistency reliability analysis. After 3 weeks, 217 participants filled out the SACS again to assess the test-retest reliability. Results: The exploratory factor analysis showed that the SACS consisted of two factors (Centering and Transcending), with a total of 9 items. The confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the two-factor structure fit well ( Conclusion: The results of our study suggest that the Chinese version of SACS has good reliability and validity in Chinese college students.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.