The aim was to investigate the psychometric properties of a proposed experimental version of the 1979 Italian adaptation of the Clinical Depression Questionnaire (Krug & Laughlin, 1976). This version is composed of an increased number of choice alternatives (5 instead of 3), tested with 240 Italian undergraduates. An exploratory item-factor analysis yielded one factor, which accounted for 28.2% of the variance. Analysis of the relationship between this version and an experimental one in 2002 of the 1979 Italian edition of the Anxiety Scale Questionnaire showed the corrective factor was not effective in increasing the discriminative power of the questionnaire for anxiety.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BendigA. W. (1953) The reliability of self-ratings as a function of the amount of verbal anchoring and the number of categories on the scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 37, 38–41.
2.
BendigA. W. (1954) Reliability and the number of rating categories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 38–44.
3.
BondT.FoxG. (2001) Applying the Rasch Model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4.
BoyleG. J. (1985) Self-report measures of depression: some psychometric considerations. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 45–59.
5.
CattellR. B. (1957) Handbook for the IPAT Anxiety Scale Questionnaire (Self-analysis form): brief verbal questionnaire, Q-form, as distinct from objective T-battery.Savoy, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
6.
CattellR. B. (1966) The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 141–161.
7.
CattellR. B.ScheierI. H. (1961) The meaning and measurement of neuroticism and anxiety.New York: Ronald.
8.
CicchettiD. V.ShowalterD.TyrerR. J. (1985) The effect of number of rating scales categories on levels on interrater reliability: a Monte Carlo investigation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 31–36.
9.
CioffiR.GuicciardiM. (2002) [Anxiety Scale Questionnaire-Eysenck Personality Inventory, Adult Form: explorative factorial analysis with variation of alternatives of response]. Attualità in Psicologia, 17, 47–66. [in Italian]
10.
CouchA.KenistonK. (1960) Yeahsayers and naysayers: agreeing response set as a personality variable. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 60, 151–174.
11.
CronbachL. J. (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.
12.
DelheesK. H.CattellR. B. (1975) Handbook for the Clinical Analysis Questionnaire.Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
13.
FinnR. H. (1972) Effects of some variations in rating scale characteristics on the means and reliabilities of ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 32, 255–265.
14.
HathawayS. R.McKinleyJ. C. (1956) Scale 2 (Depression). In WelshG. S.DahlstromW. G. (Eds.), Basic readings in the MMPI in psychology and medicine.Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota Press. Pp. 51–73.
15.
KlineP. (1994) An easy guide to factor analysis.London: Routledge.
16.
KomoritaS. S. (1963) Attitude content, intensity and the neutral point on a Likert scale. Journal of Social Psychology, 61, 327–334.
17.
KrugS. E.LaughlinJ. E. (1976) Handhook for the IPAT Depression Scale.Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
18.
KrugS. E.ScheierI. H.CattellR. B. (1976) Anxiety Scale Questionnaire.Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
19.
La VoieA. L. (1978) Review of the IPAT Depression Scale. In BurosO. K. (Ed.), The eighth mental measurements yearbook.Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon. Pp. 859–861.
LissitzR. W.GreenS. B. (1975) Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: a Monte Carlo approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 10–13.
22.
LopezW. (1996) Communication validity and rating scales. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 10, 482–483.
23.
LykkenD. T. (1978) Review of the IPAT Depression Scale. In BurosO. K. (Ed.), The eighth mental measurements yearbook.Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon. Pp. 340–343.
24.
MillerG. A. (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
25.
NovagaM., & PedonA. (Eds.) (1979) Questionario di autovaluatazione CDQ (IPAT Depression Scale, Italian adaptation). Florence, Italy: Organizzazioni Speciali.
26.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978) Psychometric theory. (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
27.
RamseyJ. O. (1973) The effect of number of categories in rating scales on precision of estimation of scale values. Psychometrika, 38, 4.
