Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Centre for Clinical Interventions, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Assessment. 2022 Dec;29(8):1730-1741. doi: 10.1177/10731911211028657. Epub 2021 Jul 6.
Repetitive negative thinking is conceptualized to be a transdiagnostic process linked to the development and maintenance of psychopathology. Prior research distinguishes between disorder-specific exemplars (worry, rumination) and transdiagnostic measures of repetitive negative thinking with differences across disorders reported. However, establishing the measurement invariance of these measures is necessary to support meaningful comparisons across clinical groups.
Bayesian structural equation modelling was used to assess the approximate invariance of the Ruminative Response Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, and the Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire across individuals with a principal diagnosis of either depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, or generalized anxiety disorder.
All scales demonstrated approximate measurement invariance across the three disorder groups. The depressive disorder group reported a higher level of rumination than the generalized anxiety disorder group (Δµ = 0.25, 95% Credibility Interval [0.06, 0.45]), with no difference between the generalized anxiety disorder and social anxiety disorder groups. The depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder groups did not differ in their levels of trait repetitive negative thinking, but the social anxiety disorder group was markedly lower than the generalized anxiety disorder group (Δµ = -0.21 [-0.37, -0.05]). Similarly, levels of worry did not differ between the generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorder group but were lower in the social anxiety disorder group than the generalized anxiety disorder group (Δµ = -0.23 [-0.41, -0.06]).
The Ruminative Response Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, and Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire are measuring trait repetitive negative thinking in a consistent manner across individuals with a principal diagnosis of depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, or generalized anxiety disorder. This supports their use in transdiagnostic contexts and indicates that it is appropriate to directly compare the scores on these measures between diagnostic groups.
重复消极思维被概念化为与精神病理学的发展和维持有关的一种跨诊断过程。先前的研究区分了特定障碍的范例（担忧、沉思）和重复消极思维的跨诊断测量，报告了不同障碍之间的差异。然而，建立这些测量方法的测量不变性对于支持跨临床组进行有意义的比较是必要的。
贝叶斯结构方程模型用于评估在主要诊断为抑郁障碍、社交焦虑障碍或广泛性焦虑障碍的个体中，沉思反应量表、宾夕法尼亚州担忧问卷和重复思维问卷的近似不变性。
所有量表在三个障碍组中均表现出近似的测量不变性。抑郁障碍组报告的沉思水平高于广泛性焦虑障碍组（Δµ=0.25，95%可信区间[0.06，0.45]），而广泛性焦虑障碍组和社交焦虑障碍组之间没有差异。抑郁障碍组和广泛性焦虑障碍组在特质性重复消极思维水平上没有差异，但社交焦虑障碍组明显低于广泛性焦虑障碍组（Δµ=-0.21[-0.37，-0.05]）。同样，广泛性焦虑障碍组和抑郁障碍组之间的担忧水平没有差异，但社交焦虑障碍组的担忧水平低于广泛性焦虑障碍组（Δµ=-0.23[-0.41，-0.06]）。
在主要诊断为抑郁障碍、社交焦虑障碍或广泛性焦虑障碍的个体中，沉思反应量表、宾夕法尼亚州担忧问卷和重复思维问卷以一致的方式测量特质性重复消极思维。这支持了它们在跨诊断情境中的使用，并表明在这些测量之间直接比较诊断组的分数是合适的。
