Sportsmanship rating scale in tennis competition with young players

World Conference on Psychology and Sociology 2012

Psychometric evaluation and experimental validation of the statistics anxiety rating scale.

The Statistics Anxiety Rating Scale (STARS) was adapted into German to examine its psychometric properties (n = 400). Two validation studies (n = 66, n = 96) were conducted to examine its criterion-related validity. The psychometric properties of the questionnaire were very similar to those previously reported for the original English version in various countries and other language versions. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated 2 second-order factors: One was more closely related to anxiety and the other was more closely related to negative attitudes toward statistics. Predictive validity of the STARS was shown both in an experimental exam-like situation in the laboratory and during a real examination situation. Taken together, the findings indicate that statistics anxiety as assessed by the STARS is a useful construct that is more than just an expression of a more general disposition to anxiety.

The structure of the Statistics Anxiety Rating Scale: A confirmatory factor analysis using UK psychology students

This study aimed to examine the structure of the statistics anxiety rating scale. Responses from 650 undergraduate psychology students throughout the UK were collected through an on-line study. Based on previous research three different models were specified and estimated using confirmatory factor analysis. Fit indices were used to determine if the model fitted the data and a likelihood ratio difference test was used to determine the best fitting model. The original six factor model was the best explanation of the data. All six subscales were intercorrelated and internally consistent. It was concluded that the statistics anxiety rating scale was found to measure the six subscales it was designed to assess in a UK population.

Dimensionality, Reliability and Validity of the InterRAI Depression Rating Scale in a Canadian Palliative Care Population

A reliable and valid instrument is needed to screen for depression in palliative patients. The interRAI Depression Rating Scale (DRS) is based on seven items in the interRAI Palliative Care instrument. This study is the first to explore the dimensionality, reliability and validity of the DRS in a palliative population. Palliative home care patients (n = 5,175) residing in Ontario (Canada) were assessed with the interRAI Palliative Care instrument. Exploratory factor analysis and Mokken scale analysis were used to identify candidate conceptual models and evaluate scale homogeneity/performance. Confirmatory factor analysis compared models using standard goodness-of-fit indices. Convergent and divergent validity were investigated by examining polychoric correlations between the DRS and other items. The “known groups” test determined if the DRS meaningfully distinguished among client subgroups. The non-hierarchical two factor model showed acceptable fit with the data, and ordinal alpha coefficients of 0.83 and 0.82 were observed for the two DRS subscales. Omega hierarchical (ωh) was 0.78 for the bifactor model, with the general factor explaining three quarters of the common variance. Despite the multidimensionality evident in the factor analyses, bifactor modelling and the Mokken homogeneity coefficient (0.34) suggest that the DRS is a coherent scale that captures important information on sub-constructs of depression (e.g., somatic symptoms). Higher correlations were seen between the DRS and mood and psychosocial well-being items, and lower correlations with functional status and demographic variables. The DRS distinguished in the expected manner for known risk factors (e.g., social support, pain). The results suggest that the DRS is primarily unidimensional and reliable for use in screening for depression in palliative care patients.

Psychometric Properties of the Inventário Dimensional Clínico da Personalidade (IDCP) using the Rating Scale Model

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory (DCPI) using Rasch-based person and item analysis. 1281 participants were recruited, between 18 and 90 years of age (M=26.64; SD=8.94), 431 men (33.6%) and 127 (9.9%) patients diagnosed with axis I disorders and/or axis II according to DSM-IV-TR. Results indicated the IDCP scales performed reasonably well, and the usefulness of the analyses presented, demonstrate the Rasch model’s applicability for clinical applications. Among the important tools offered by the Rasch model, we explore the use of the person-item map, which visually presents the intuitively understandable psychological construct along the dimensional scale of the instrument.

Analyzing data from a fuzzy rating scale-based questionnaire : a case study

Resumen tomado de la publicaci??n

An item response analysis of the motor and behavioral subscales of the unified Huntington's disease rating scale in huntington disease gene expansion carriers

Although the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) is widely used in the assessment of Huntington disease (HD), the ability of individual items to discriminate individual differences in motor or behavioral manifestations has not been extensively studied in HD gene expansion carriers without a motor-defined clinical diagnosis (ie, prodromal-HD or prHD). To elucidate the relationship between scores on individual motor and behavioral UHDRS items and total score for each subscale, a nonparametric item response analysis was performed on retrospective data from 2 multicenter longitudinal studies. Motor and behavioral assessments were supplied for 737 prHD individuals with data from 2114 visits (PREDICT-HD) and 686 HD individuals with data from 1482 visits (REGISTRY). Option characteristic curves were generated for UHDRS subscale items in relation to their subscale score. In prHD, overall severity of motor signs was low, and participants had scores of 2 or above on very few items. In HD, motor items that assessed ocular pursuit, saccade initiation, finger tapping, tandem walking, and to a lesser extent, saccade velocity, dysarthria, tongue protrusion, pronation/supination, Luria, bradykinesia, choreas, gait, and balance on the retropulsion test were found to discriminate individual differences across a broad range of motor severity. In prHD, depressed mood, anxiety, and irritable behavior demonstrated good discriminative properties. In HD, depressed mood demonstrated a good relationship with the overall behavioral score. These data suggest that at least some UHDRS items appear to have utility across a broad range of severity, although many items demonstrate problematic features.

The bipolar depression rating scale (BDRS) : its development, validation and utility

Objectives: Unipolar and bipolar depression differ neurobiologically and in clinical presentation. Existing depression rating instruments, used in bipolar depression, fail to capture the necessary phenomenological nuances, as they are based on and skewed towards the characteristics of unipolar depression. Both clinically and in research there is a growing need for a new observer-rated scale that is specifically designed to assess bipolar depression.

Methods: An instrument reflecting the characteristics of bipolar depression was drafted by the authors, and administered to 122 participants aged 18–65 (44 males and 78 females) with a diagnosis of DSM-IV bipolar disorder, who were currently experiencing symptoms of depression. The Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS) was administered together with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS).

Results: The BDRS has strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.917), and robust correlation coefficients with the MADRS (r = 0.906) and HAM-D (r = 0.744), and the mixed subscale correlated with the YMRS (r = 0.757). Exploratory factor analysis showed a three-factor solution gave the best account of the data. These factors corresponded to depression (somatic), depression (psychological) and mixed symptom clusters.

Conclusions: This study provides evidence for the validity of the BDRS for the measurement of depression in bipolar disorder. These results suggest good internal validity, provisional evidence of inter-rater reliability and strong correlations with other depression rating scales.

Scale matters : the need for a Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS)

Objective: To briefly review the clinical and biological distinctions between unipolar and bipolar depression critiquing in particular currently available depression rating scales and discuss the need for a new observer-rated scale tailored to bipolar depression.

Method: Relevant literature pertaining to the symptomatic differences between bipolar disorder and unipolar disorder as well as their measurement using existing assessment scales was identified by computerized searches and reviews of scientific journals known to the authors.

Results: Bipolar depression is distinct from unipolar depression in terms of phenomenology and clinical characteristics. These distinguishing features can be used to identify bipolarity in patients that present with recurrent depressive episodes. This is important because current self-report and observer-rated scales are optimized for unipolar depression, and hence limited in their ability to accurately assess bipolar depression.

Conclusion: The development of a specific bipolar depression rating scale will improve the assessment of bipolar depression in both research and clinical settings and assist the development of better treatments and interventions.

The validity and internal structure of the bipolar depression rating scale (BDRS): data from a clinical trial of N-acetylcysteine as adjunctive therapy in bipolar disorder

Background: The phenomenology of unipolar and bipolar disorders differ in a number of ways, such as the presence of mixed states and atypical features. Conventional depression rating instruments are designed to capture the characteristics of unipolar depression and have limitations in capturing the breadth of bipolar disorder.

Method: The Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS) was administered together with the Montgomery Asberg Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) in a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial of N-acetyl cysteine for bipolar disorder (N = 75).

Results: A factor analysis showed a two-factor solution: depression and mixed symptom clusters. The BDRS has strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.917), the depression cluster showed robust correlation with the MADRS (r = 0.865) and the mixed subscale correlated with the YMRS (r = 0.750).

Conclusion: The BDRS has good internal validity and inter-rater reliability and is sensitive to change in the context of a clinical trial.

Transcultural adaption and validation of the Spanish version of the Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS-S)

The Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS) arguably better captures symptoms in bipolar depression especially depressive mixed states than traditional unipolar depression rating scales. The psychometric properties of the Spanish adapted version, BDRS-S, are reported.