IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v3y2013i2p2158244013492540.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personality, Psychopathology, and the Neurotransmitter Attributes Questionnaire (NAQ)

Author

Listed:
  • Lynn E. O’Connor
  • Jack W. Berry
  • Thomas Lewis
  • Rachna K. Rangan
  • Natalie Poursohrab

Abstract

In this study, 901 participants completed an anonymous Internet-based survey, including a new instrument, the Neurotransmitter Attributes Questionnaire (NAQ), indicating possible dysfunction of the serotonergic or dopaminergic circuits. NAQ items were derived from questions prescribing professionals commonly ask new patients whose symptoms call for psychopharmacological treatments, sometimes in combination with psychosocial interventions. Rasch modeling was used to establish item quality, subscale reliability, and unidimensionality. In addition, the items in each subscale were found reliable when judged by three blind raters who were experienced psychopharmacologists. Standard measures of mental disorders and self-reported diagnoses were used to validate the NAQ subscales. These questions that form the subscales on the NAQ may be helpful when determining the class of medication likely to be most effective. Variations in mood and anxiety-disordered patients call for a case-specific approach to pharmacological treatment. Some patients are best helped by serotonergic agonists, others have a better outcome from treatment with dopaminergic agonists, and some patients seem to be best served by a combination of both. The NAQ was designed to aid decision-making early in treatment, potentially leading to greater compliance and better outcome. The NAQ may be used to standardize protocols in outcome research, and in addition, it may provide a new perspective on personality studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Lynn E. O’Connor & Jack W. Berry & Thomas Lewis & Rachna K. Rangan & Natalie Poursohrab, 2013. "Personality, Psychopathology, and the Neurotransmitter Attributes Questionnaire (NAQ)," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(2), pages 21582440134, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:2158244013492540
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244013492540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244013492540
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244013492540?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Andrich, 1978. "A rating formulation for ordered response categories," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 43(4), pages 561-573, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anum Khan & Muhammad Shujaat Mubarik, 2022. "Measuring the role of neurotransmitters in investment decision: A proposed constructs," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 258-274, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chang, Hsin-Li & Yang, Cheng-Hua, 2008. "Explore airlines’ brand niches through measuring passengers’ repurchase motivation—an application of Rasch measurement," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 105-112.
    2. Ivana Bassi & Matteo Carzedda & Enrico Gori & Luca Iseppi, 2022. "Rasch analysis of consumer attitudes towards the mountain product label," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, December.
    3. Wanke, Peter Fernandes & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel José & Moreira Antunes, Jorge Junio & Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz & Roubaud, David & Sobreiro, Vinicius Amorim & Santibanez Gonzalez‬, Erne, 2021. "An original information entropy-based quantitative evaluation model for low-carbon operations in an emerging market," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    4. Hua-Hua Chang, 1996. "The asymptotic posterior normality of the latent trait for polytomous IRT models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 445-463, September.
    5. Curt Hagquist & Raili Välimaa & Nina Simonsen & Sakari Suominen, 2017. "Differential Item Functioning in Trend Analyses of Adolescent Mental Health – Illustrative Examples Using HBSC-Data from Finland," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 10(3), pages 673-691, September.
    6. Wang, Luming & Finn, Adam, 2014. "A psychometric theory that measures up to marketing reality: An adapted Many Faceted IRT model," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 93-102.
    7. Huang, Jen-Hung & Peng, Kua-Hsin, 2012. "Fuzzy Rasch model in TOPSIS: A new approach for generating fuzzy numbers to assess the competitiveness of the tourism industries in Asian countries," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 456-465.
    8. Wendy L. Martin & Alexander McKelvie & G. T. Lumpkin, 2016. "Centralization and delegation practices in family versus non-family SMEs: a Rasch analysis," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 755-769, October.
    9. Chang, Hsin-Li & Wu, Shun-Cheng, 2008. "Exploring the vehicle dependence behind mode choice: Evidence of motorcycle dependence in Taipei," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 307-320, February.
    10. Silvia Golia, 2015. "Assessing the impact of uniform and nonuniform differential item functioning items on Rasch measure: the polytomous case," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 441-461, June.
    11. Jesper Tijmstra & Maria Bolsinova, 2019. "Bayes Factors for Evaluating Latent Monotonicity in Polytomous Item Response Theory Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 846-869, September.
    12. Salzberger, Thomas & Koller, Monika, 2013. "Towards a new paradigm of measurement in marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1307-1317.
    13. Richard N McNeely & Salissou Moutari & Samuel Arba-Mosquera & Shwetabh Verma & Jonathan E Moore, 2018. "An alternative application of Rasch analysis to assess data from ophthalmic patient-reported outcome instruments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, June.
    14. Francesca DE BATTISTI & Giovanna NICOLINI & Silvia SALINI, 2008. "Methodological overview of Rasch model and application in customer satisfaction survey data," Departmental Working Papers 2008-04, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    15. Kuan-Yu Jin & Yi-Jhen Wu & Hui-Fang Chen, 2022. "A New Multiprocess IRT Model With Ideal Points for Likert-Type Items," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 47(3), pages 297-321, June.
    16. van der Ark, L. Andries, 2012. "New Developments in Mokken Scale Analysis in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i05).
    17. Piotr Tarka, 2013. "Model of latent profile factor analysis for ordered categorical data," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 14(1), pages 171-182, March.
    18. Xiaohui Zheng & Sophia Rabe-Hesketh, 2007. "Estimating parameters of dichotomous and ordinal item response models with gllamm," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 313-333, September.
    19. Purya Baghaei & Jerrell Cassady, 2014. "Validation of the Persian Translation of the Cognitive Test Anxiety Scale," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(4), pages 21582440145, November.
    20. Kenneth Royal & Liara Gonzalez, 2016. "An Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of an Advising Survey for Medical and Professional Program Students," Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 6(1), pages 195-195, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:2158244013492540. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.