Costs and benefits of item reduction: The abridgment of the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ).

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of affective disorders Pub Date : 2025-01-15 Epub Date: 2024-10-21 DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2024.10.079
Giusy Danila Valenti, Palmira Faraci
{"title":"Costs and benefits of item reduction: The abridgment of the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ).","authors":"Giusy Danila Valenti, Palmira Faraci","doi":"10.1016/j.jad.2024.10.079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Shortening existing instruments is a highly required procedure, as short scales may have several advantages over the long versions, especially in time and/or resources restrictions. However, abbreviated forms may be weaker than their parent versions from both content coverage and psychometric robustness. Also, the abridgment of instruments is often lacking in methodological strictness, and the potential drawbacks of the shortened scales are rarely reported. The current study aims to describe the whole process of scale shortening, emphasizing the potential costs and benefits, in terms of balance between time-resource savings and loss of validity and reliability. We shortened the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ), involving a sample of 459 participants (53.2% males). Item reduction was driven by searching to preserve the content breadth of the construct and scale's psychometric quality. Our results supported the two-factor structure of the measure (Cognitive Reappraisal and Expressive Suppression), χ<sup>2</sup><sub>(8)</sub> = 11.357 ns, CFI = 0.995, TLI = 0.990, RMSEA = 0.030 (0.000-0.067), SRMR = 0.031, and three items were selected for each subscale. The two intended factors showed good levels of reliability (α > 0.710). A latent variable model was performed to evaluate how the original ERQ and our proposed short version (ERQS) were related to depression, anxiety, and stress: A similar pattern of associations was found, with Cognitive Reappraisal (negatively) and Expressive Suppression (positively) reporting significant but weak associations. The ERQ-S can be beneficial over the original version, as it effectively assesses the two emotion regulation strategies with a trivial loss in reliability and predictive validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":14963,"journal":{"name":"Journal of affective disorders","volume":"369 ","pages":"978-985"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of affective disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2024.10.079","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Shortening existing instruments is a highly required procedure, as short scales may have several advantages over the long versions, especially in time and/or resources restrictions. However, abbreviated forms may be weaker than their parent versions from both content coverage and psychometric robustness. Also, the abridgment of instruments is often lacking in methodological strictness, and the potential drawbacks of the shortened scales are rarely reported. The current study aims to describe the whole process of scale shortening, emphasizing the potential costs and benefits, in terms of balance between time-resource savings and loss of validity and reliability. We shortened the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ), involving a sample of 459 participants (53.2% males). Item reduction was driven by searching to preserve the content breadth of the construct and scale's psychometric quality. Our results supported the two-factor structure of the measure (Cognitive Reappraisal and Expressive Suppression), χ2(8) = 11.357 ns, CFI = 0.995, TLI = 0.990, RMSEA = 0.030 (0.000-0.067), SRMR = 0.031, and three items were selected for each subscale. The two intended factors showed good levels of reliability (α > 0.710). A latent variable model was performed to evaluate how the original ERQ and our proposed short version (ERQS) were related to depression, anxiety, and stress: A similar pattern of associations was found, with Cognitive Reappraisal (negatively) and Expressive Suppression (positively) reporting significant but weak associations. The ERQ-S can be beneficial over the original version, as it effectively assesses the two emotion regulation strategies with a trivial loss in reliability and predictive validity.

减少项目的成本与收益:情绪调节问卷(ERQ)的删节。
缩短现有工具是一个非常必要的程序,因为短量表可能比长量表有一些优势,特别是在时间和/或资源限制方面。然而,缩减后的量表在内容覆盖面和心理测量稳健性方面都可能弱于其母版。此外,对量表的删节往往缺乏严格的方法论,而缩短量表的潜在缺点也很少被报道。本研究旨在描述量表缩短的整个过程,强调在节省时间资源与损失效度和信度之间平衡的潜在成本和收益。我们缩短了情绪调节问卷(ERQ),涉及 459 名参与者(53.2% 为男性)。缩减项目的目的是为了保留量表的内容广度和心理测量质量。我们的结果支持测量的双因素结构(认知重评和表达压抑),χ2(8) = 11.357 ns, CFI = 0.995, TLI = 0.990, RMSEA = 0.030 (0.000-0.067), SRMR = 0.031,每个分量表选择了三个项目。两个预定因子显示出良好的信度(α > 0.710)。我们建立了一个潜在变量模型,以评估原始 ERQ 和我们提出的简易版 ERQS 与抑郁、焦虑和压力之间的关系:结果发现了相似的关联模式,认知重评(负相关)和表达压抑(正相关)的关联显著但较弱。与原始版本相比,ERQ-S 可以有效地评估两种情绪调节策略,而在可靠性和预测有效性方面的损失微乎其微。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of affective disorders
Journal of affective disorders 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
6.10%
发文量
1319
审稿时长
9.3 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Affective Disorders publishes papers concerned with affective disorders in the widest sense: depression, mania, mood spectrum, emotions and personality, anxiety and stress. It is interdisciplinary and aims to bring together different approaches for a diverse readership. Top quality papers will be accepted dealing with any aspect of affective disorders, including neuroimaging, cognitive neurosciences, genetics, molecular biology, experimental and clinical neurosciences, pharmacology, neuroimmunoendocrinology, intervention and treatment trials.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信