The Reliability of Self-Report in Clinical Psychology: Evidence from Outpatient Clinics in Malawi

Hope Herbert Nkhoma
Additional contact information
Hope Herbert Nkhoma: Lecturer and Head of Psychology, Malawi Assemblies of God University, Lilongwe

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 2025, vol. 9, issue 10, 1125-1132

Abstract: Self-report measures are a common tool in clinical psychology for understanding a person's mental health symptoms and deciding on treatment plans. But people often wonder how reliable these measures really are, especially when used in different healthcare settings. This particular study took a closer look at the reliability of some frequently used self-report measures. The researcher gathered information from 60 participants who were visiting outpatient mental health clinics in Malawi. These participants filled out standard measures about depression, anxiety, and stress, and then did the same set of questionnaires again two weeks later to see if their answers stayed consistent (this is called test-retest reliability). The researcher also checked how well the questions within each questionnaire went together (internal consistency) using a measure called Cronbach's alpha, and looked at the stability of the results over time using something called intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). The results showed that the questionnaires were quite consistent internally across all of them (alpha scores were between .82 and .91). However, the consistency over the two weeks varied depending on what was being measured. The anxiety measures seemed to be the least stable (ICC = .68). When the researcher talked to the clinicians involved, discovered that there were often noticeable differences between what the self-report questionnaires suggested and the clinicians own professional opinions, particularly for clients with lower levels of literacy or those dealing with cultural stigma around mental health. These results highlight how important it is to adapt assessments based on the specific context and to include other types of evaluations, like those done by clinicians, to make diagnoses more accurate. The study goes on to discuss what these findings mean for how clinicians work and for developing better assessment tools in the future.

Date: 2025
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/ ... -1132-202511_pdf.pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/ ... t-clinics-in-malawi/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bcp:journl:v:9:y:2025:i:10:p:1125-1132

Access Statistics for this article

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science is currently edited by Dr. Nidhi Malhan

More articles in International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science from International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dr. Pawan Verma ().