Psychometrics of the Dyadic Coping Inventory in three language groups

This article introduces the Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI; Bodenmann, 2008) and aims (1) to investigate the reliability and aspects of the validity of the Italian and French versions of the DCI, and (2) to replicate its factor structure and reliabilities using a new Swiss German sample. Based on 216 German-, 378 Italian-, and 198 French-speaking participants, the factor structure of the original German inventory was able to be replicated by using principal components analysis in all three groups after excluding two items in the Italian and French versions. The latter were shown to be as reliable as the German version with the exception of the low reliabilities of negative dyadic coping in the French group. Confirmatory factor analyses provided additional support for delegated dyadic coping and evaluation of dyadic coping. Intercorrelations among scales were similar across all three languages groups with a few exceptions. Previous findings could be replicated in all three groups, showing that aspects of dyadic coping were more strongly related to marital quality than to dyadic communication. The use of the dyadic coping scales in the actor-partner interdependence model, the common fate model, and the mutual influence model is discussed.

The four- vs. alternative six-factor structure of the French WISC-IV: Comparison using confirmatory factor analyses

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses reported in the French technical manual of the WISC-IV provides evidence supporting a structure with four indices: Verbal Comprehension (VCI), Perceptual Reasoning (PRI), Working Memory (WMI), and Processing Speed (PSI). Although the WISC-IV is more attuned to contemporary theory, it is still not in total accordance with the dominant theory: the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive ability. This study was designed to determine whether the French WISC-IV is better described with the four-factor solution or whether an alternative model based on the CHC theory is more appropriate. The intercorrelations matrix reported in the French technical manual was submitted to confirmatory factor analysis. A comparison of competing models suggests that a model based on the CHC theory fits the data better than the current WISC-IV structure. It appears that the French WISC-IV in fact measures six factors: crystallized intelligence (Gc), fluid intelligence (Gf), short-term memory (Gsm), processing speed (Gs), quantitative knowledge (Gq), and visual processing (Gv). We recommend that clinicians interpret the subtests of the French WISC-IV in relation to this CHC model in addition to the four indices.