The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale: Support for a Bifactor Model With a Dominant General Factor and a Specific Factor for Positive Affect

Rapson Gomez, Suzanne McLaren

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: 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. Method: Participants (N = 1,178) were older adults from the general community who completed the CES-D. Results: 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. Discussion: 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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)351-360
Number of pages10
JournalAssessment
Volume22
Issue number3
Early online date31 Jul 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 10 Jun 2015

Fingerprint

Epidemiologic Studies
Reproducibility of Results
Statistical Factor Analysis

Cite this

@article{6c67ddcb542c481e857be0a3110e9634,
title = "The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale: Support for a Bifactor Model With a Dominant General Factor and a Specific Factor for Positive Affect",
abstract = "Objectives: 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. Method: Participants (N = 1,178) were older adults from the general community who completed the CES-D. Results: 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. Discussion: 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.",
keywords = "bifactor model, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, CES-D, external validity, internal consistency, older adults",
author = "Rapson Gomez and Suzanne McLaren",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1177/1073191114545357",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "351--360",
journal = "Assessment",
issn = "1073-1911",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale

T2 - Support for a Bifactor Model With a Dominant General Factor and a Specific Factor for Positive Affect

AU - Gomez, Rapson

AU - McLaren, Suzanne

PY - 2015/6/10

Y1 - 2015/6/10

N2 - Objectives: 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. Method: Participants (N = 1,178) were older adults from the general community who completed the CES-D. Results: 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. Discussion: 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.

AB - Objectives: 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. Method: Participants (N = 1,178) were older adults from the general community who completed the CES-D. Results: 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. Discussion: 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.

KW - bifactor model

KW - Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale

KW - CES-D

KW - external validity

KW - internal consistency

KW - older adults

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930722735&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930722735&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1073191114545357

DO - 10.1177/1073191114545357

M3 - Article

C2 - 25085880

AN - SCOPUS:84930722735

VL - 22

SP - 351

EP - 360

JO - Assessment

JF - Assessment

SN - 1073-1911

IS - 3

ER -