Examining Cross-Cultural Invariance of Common Mental Disorder Symptom Measures in the United States and Singapore

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Cognitive Therapy and Research Pub Date : 2024-08-23 DOI:10.1007/s10608-024-10519-4
Natalia Van Doren, Nur Hani Zainal, Ryan Y. Hong, Michelle G. Newman
{"title":"Examining Cross-Cultural Invariance of Common Mental Disorder Symptom Measures in the United States and Singapore","authors":"Natalia Van Doren, Nur Hani Zainal, Ryan Y. Hong, Michelle G. Newman","doi":"10.1007/s10608-024-10519-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>Constructs of common mental disorder (CMD) symptoms, including anxiety, depression, obsessions, compulsions, and worry, are observed in a wide range of psychiatric conditions. Reliable and valid measurements of these CMD symptoms are essential for building a generalizable science of psychopathology and ensuring valid comparisons of scores across distinct groups. Accordingly, the current study determined the psychometric properties of four widely used CMD symptom measures in the United States (U.S.) and Singapore.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Method</h3><p>Participants comprised college students (U.S.: <i>n</i> = 292; SG: <i>n</i> = 144) who completed the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised (OCI-R), and Penn State Worry Questionnaire-Abbreviated (PSWQ-A).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Strict measurement invariance (equal factor loadings, item thresholds, residual variances) was observed for all measures across cultures. Singapore had higher latent mean scores of worry than the U.S. sample.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>Overall, findings suggest a strong degree of cross-cultural construct compatibility. Given this finding, higher latent factor means for worry, perfectionism, and uncertainty scores likely reflect true group differences, suggesting that these symptom measures can be used to aid further study and assessment of cross-cultural differences in symptom prevalence and presentation in CMDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":48316,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Therapy and Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Therapy and Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-024-10519-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Constructs of common mental disorder (CMD) symptoms, including anxiety, depression, obsessions, compulsions, and worry, are observed in a wide range of psychiatric conditions. Reliable and valid measurements of these CMD symptoms are essential for building a generalizable science of psychopathology and ensuring valid comparisons of scores across distinct groups. Accordingly, the current study determined the psychometric properties of four widely used CMD symptom measures in the United States (U.S.) and Singapore.

Method

Participants comprised college students (U.S.: n = 292; SG: n = 144) who completed the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised (OCI-R), and Penn State Worry Questionnaire-Abbreviated (PSWQ-A).

Results

Strict measurement invariance (equal factor loadings, item thresholds, residual variances) was observed for all measures across cultures. Singapore had higher latent mean scores of worry than the U.S. sample.

Conclusions

Overall, findings suggest a strong degree of cross-cultural construct compatibility. Given this finding, higher latent factor means for worry, perfectionism, and uncertainty scores likely reflect true group differences, suggesting that these symptom measures can be used to aid further study and assessment of cross-cultural differences in symptom prevalence and presentation in CMDs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
研究美国和新加坡常见精神障碍症状测量的跨文化不变性
背景常见精神障碍(CMD)症状的结构,包括焦虑、抑郁、强迫、强迫症和担忧,可在多种精神疾病中观察到。对这些常见精神障碍症状进行可靠而有效的测量,对于建立具有普遍意义的精神病理学和确保有效比较不同群体的得分至关重要。因此,本研究确定了在美国和新加坡广泛使用的四种 CMD 症状测量方法的心理测量特性。结果在不同文化背景下,所有测量指标均具有严格的测量不变量(因子载荷、项目阈值、残差均相等)。结论总体而言,研究结果表明,跨文化建构具有很强的兼容性。鉴于这一发现,担忧、完美主义和不确定性得分较高的潜在因子平均值可能反映了真正的群体差异,这表明这些症状测量可用于帮助进一步研究和评估 CMD 症状流行和表现的跨文化差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognitive Therapy and Research
Cognitive Therapy and Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: Cognitive Therapy and Research (COTR) focuses on the investigation of cognitive processes in human adaptation and adjustment and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). It is an interdisciplinary journal welcoming submissions from diverse areas of psychology, including cognitive, clinical, developmental, experimental, personality, social, learning, affective neuroscience, emotion research, therapy mechanism, and pharmacotherapy.
期刊最新文献
Examining Relationships between Psychological Flexibility and Comorbidity of Depression and Anxiety: A Network Analysis in a Non-Clinical Community Sample Lay Theories for Social Anxiety: Examining the Impact of Viewing Social Anxiety as Malleable Due to Personal Effort versus Fixed in Nature in a Non-clinical Sample Training to Increase Processing of Positive Content Paradoxically Decreases Positive Memory Bias in High Levels of Depression Associations Between Self-Criticism, Basic Psychological Needs Frustration, and Self-Damaging Behaviors: An Application of Self-Determination Theory Relapse prevention following guided self-help for common health problems: A Scoping Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1