Fong Ted C T, Chan Cecilia L W, Ho Rainbow T H, Chan Jessie S M, Chan Celia H Y, Ng S M
Centre on Behavioral Health, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong.
Department of Social Work and Social Administration, Jockey Club Tower, The Centennial Campus, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong.
Qual Life Res. 2016 Mar;25(3):731-7. doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-1105-5. Epub 2015 Aug 18.
The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) is a widely used instrument for measuring depressive symptoms. Though conventional factor analytic evaluations supported the use of four sub-scales for the CES-D, existing studies have yet to adopt the bi-factor analytic approach in psychometric assessment of the 20-item inventory. The present study aimed to apply both confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory bi-factor analysis to evaluate the dimensionality of the CES-D.
Current scoring practice of the CES-D (single-factor, four-factor, and second-order models) was tested using confirmatory factor analyses in a sample of 706 Chinese persons with insomnia and depressive symptoms. As an alternative, exploratory bi-factor analysis was conducted to examine the utility of the general depression factor and specific factors.
Existing measurement models on the CES-D did not provide an adequate model fit to the data in terms of model fit indices and discriminant validity. The bi-factor model revealed a general depression factor that accounted for the majority of the item variance. The three specific factors (somatic symptoms, positive affect, and interpersonal problems) provided little unique information over and above the general factor and plausibly represent a methodological artifact rather than a substantive factor.
The present study demonstrated empirical support for the bi-factor model as a realistic representation of the underlying structure of the CES-D. Researchers and clinicians are better served by simply using a single measure of depression.
流行病学研究中心抑郁量表(CES - D)是一种广泛用于测量抑郁症状的工具。尽管传统的因素分析评估支持使用CES - D的四个子量表,但现有研究尚未在对这个20项量表的心理测量评估中采用双因素分析方法。本研究旨在应用验证性因素分析和探索性双因素分析来评估CES - D的维度。
在706名有失眠和抑郁症状的中国人样本中,使用验证性因素分析对CES - D当前的计分方法(单因素、四因素和二阶模型)进行了测试。作为替代方法,进行了探索性双因素分析以检验一般抑郁因素和特定因素的效用。
就模型拟合指数和区分效度而言,现有的CES - D测量模型对数据的拟合效果不佳。双因素模型揭示了一个占项目方差大部分的一般抑郁因素。三个特定因素(躯体症状、积极情绪和人际问题)在一般因素之外几乎没有提供独特的信息,并且可能代表一种方法学假象而非实质性因素。
本研究为双因素模型作为CES - D潜在结构的现实表征提供了实证支持。研究人员和临床医生通过简单地使用单一的抑郁测量方法会得到更好的结果。