Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale in a Mixed Clinical Sample

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Ecklund-Johnson ◽  
Steven A. Miller ◽  
Jerry J. Sweet
2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fawzi S. Daoud ◽  
Amjed A. Abojedi

This study investigates the equivalent factorial structure of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) in clinical and nonclinical Jordanian populations, using both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The 53-item checklist was administered to 647 nonclinical participants and 315 clinical participants. Eight factors emerged from the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) for the nonclinical sample, and six factors emerged for the clinical sample. When tested by parallel analysis (PA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the results reflected a unidimensional factorial structure in both samples. Furthermore, multigroup CFA showed invariance between clinical and nonclinical unidimensional models, which lends further support to the evidence of the unidimensionality of the BSI. The study suggests that the BSI is a potentially useful measure of general psychological distress in clinical and nonclinical population. Ideas for further research are recommended.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Zelaya ◽  
Laura Cobourne ◽  
Shola Shodiya-Zeumault ◽  
Caleb N. Chadwick ◽  
Cassandra L. Hinger ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. e0181908 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mia Scheffers ◽  
Marijtje A. J. van Duijn ◽  
Ruud J. Bosscher ◽  
Durk Wiersma ◽  
Robert A. Schoevers ◽  
...  

Assessment ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 1429-1447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Heinrich ◽  
Pavle Zagorscak ◽  
Michael Eid ◽  
Christine Knaevelsrud

The Beck Depression Inventory–II is one of the most frequently used scales to assess depressive burden. Despite many psychometric evaluations, its factor structure is still a topic of debate. An increasing number of articles using fully symmetrical bifactor models have been published recently. However, they all produce anomalous results, which lead to psychometric and interpretational difficulties. To avoid anomalous results, the bifactor-(S-1) approach has recently been proposed as alternative for fitting bifactor structures. The current article compares the applicability of fully symmetrical bifactor models and symptom-oriented bifactor-(S-1) and first-order confirmatory factor analysis models in a large clinical sample ( N = 3,279) of adults. The results suggest that bifactor-(S-1) models are preferable when bifactor structures are of interest, since they reduce problematic results observed in fully symmetrical bifactor models and give the G factor an unambiguous meaning. Otherwise, symptom-oriented first-order confirmatory factor analysis models present a reasonable alternative.


2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Bradley Burton ◽  
Arash Sepehri ◽  
Fred Hecht ◽  
Anekke VandenBroek ◽  
Joseph J. Ryan ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 587-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela M. Marriner ◽  
Carmela Pestell ◽  
Donna M. Bayliss ◽  
Marie McCann ◽  
Romola S. Bucks

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-502
Author(s):  
Axel Baptista ◽  
Charlotte Soumet-Leman ◽  
Arnauld Visinet ◽  
Roland Jouvent

AbstractBackground:The short form of the Metacognitions Questionnaire (MCQ-30) is a brief multi-dimensional measure which explores the metacognitive processes and beliefs about worry and cognition that are central to the vulnerability and maintenance of emotional disorders.Aims:The first aim of the study was to create and validate a French version of the MCQ-30 in a non-clinical and a clinical sample of depressed in-patients.Method:A French adaptation of the MCQ-30 was administered to a sample of 467 individuals from the general population and 73 hospitalized patients with major depressive disorder. Internal consistency was measured by Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients. Factor structure was assessed using a confirmatory factor analysis on the non-clinical group and a multi-trait–multi-method analysis on the psychiatric group. Criterion validity was explored by comparing the scores of the two samples. Measures of rumination, worry and depression were used to explore convergent validity.Results:Confirmatory factor analysis in the non-clinical sample indicated that the French version of the MCQ-30 has the same factor structure as the MCQ-30’s original five-factor solution. In the clinical sample, the multi-trait–multi-method analysis revealed discrepancies with the original factor structure, and the MCQ-30 and its subscales were less reliable. Our results provide evidence of a convergent validity. The MCQ-30 scores were also able to discriminate between psychiatric and non-clinical samples.Conclusions:Our results show that the French version of the MCQ-30 is a valid instrument for measuring metacognitive beliefs in non-clinical population. Further research is needed to support its use among depressed in-patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document