Gomez Rapson, McLaren Suzanne
Federation University Australia, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia.
Federation University Australia, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
Assessment. 2015 Jun;22(3):351-60. doi: 10.1177/1073191114545357. Epub 2014 Jul 31.
For the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) ratings, the study examined support for a bifactor model, and also the internal consistency reliability and external validity of the factors in this model.
Participants (N = 1,178) were older adults from the general community who completed the CES-D.
Confirmatory factor analysis of their ratings indicated support for the bifactor model. For this model, the general factor explained most of the covariance in the scores of the CES-D items for Depressed Affect, Somatic Symptoms and Retarded Activity, and Interpersonal Difficulties items. Most of the covariance in the scores of the Positive Affect (PA) scale was explained by its own specific factor. Additional analyses showed support for internal consistencies and external validities of general factors based on all the CES-D items, and when PA items were excluded, and also the PA-specific factor.
The findings support the use of a total CES-D score without the PA items and also the concurrent use of the PA scale score.
对于流行病学研究中心抑郁量表(CES - D)评分,本研究检验了双因素模型的支持情况,以及该模型中各因素的内部一致性信度和外部效度。
参与者(N = 1178)为来自普通社区的老年人,他们完成了CES - D量表测试。
对他们评分的验证性因素分析表明支持双因素模型。对于该模型,一般因素解释了抑郁情绪、躯体症状、迟滞活动及人际困难项目的CES - D条目得分中的大部分协方差。积极情绪(PA)量表得分中的大部分协方差由其自身特定因素解释。进一步分析表明,基于所有CES - D条目、排除PA条目时的一般因素以及PA特定因素的内部一致性和外部效度均得到支持。
研究结果支持使用不含PA条目的CES - D总分,以及同时使用PA量表得分。