Joaquim Soler , Maria Arqueros , Carlos Schmidt , Daniela Otero , Anna Soria-Madrid , María José Campins , Anna Catalan , Elisabet Casellas , Rocío Espeso , Juan Carlos Pascual
{"title":"Scale to measure dialectical thinking from dialectical behavior therapy perspective.","authors":"Joaquim Soler , Maria Arqueros , Carlos Schmidt , Daniela Otero , Anna Soria-Madrid , María José Campins , Anna Catalan , Elisabet Casellas , Rocío Espeso , Juan Carlos Pascual","doi":"10.1016/j.ejpsy.2025.100305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Objectives</h3><div>Dialectical thinking is a core component of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), characterized by the synthesis of seemingly opposing ideas to develop a more comprehensive perspective. This study aimed to create a reliable and valid instrument for measuring dialectical thinking.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>We analyzed the psychometric properties of the Dialectical Thinking Scale in a mixed sample of 205 participants. Factor structure with both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, reliability, test-retest stability, sensitivity to change, and convergent validity were evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The final resulting questionnaire consisted of a 5-item self-reported scale. The analyses revealed a distinct two-factor structure: \"Both Sides\" (the capacity to recognize and accept opposing perspectives as simultaneously valid, thereby fostering cognitive flexibility and reducing polarized thinking) and \"Both Sides in Me\" (the ability to integrate and accept internal contradictions). The scale exhibited high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.81), and robust test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.82 for \"Both Sides\" and 0.64 for \"Both Sides in Me\"). The scale demonstrated satisfactory sensitivity to change after psychotherapeutic intervention and showed significant negative correlations with psychopathological symptoms.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This scale addresses a critical gap in clinical assessment tools for DBT and it holds promise for applications across mental disorders and social studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12045,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"39 2","pages":"Article 100305"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0213616325000163","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and Objectives
Dialectical thinking is a core component of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), characterized by the synthesis of seemingly opposing ideas to develop a more comprehensive perspective. This study aimed to create a reliable and valid instrument for measuring dialectical thinking.
Method
We analyzed the psychometric properties of the Dialectical Thinking Scale in a mixed sample of 205 participants. Factor structure with both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, reliability, test-retest stability, sensitivity to change, and convergent validity were evaluated.
Results
The final resulting questionnaire consisted of a 5-item self-reported scale. The analyses revealed a distinct two-factor structure: "Both Sides" (the capacity to recognize and accept opposing perspectives as simultaneously valid, thereby fostering cognitive flexibility and reducing polarized thinking) and "Both Sides in Me" (the ability to integrate and accept internal contradictions). The scale exhibited high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.81), and robust test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.82 for "Both Sides" and 0.64 for "Both Sides in Me"). The scale demonstrated satisfactory sensitivity to change after psychotherapeutic intervention and showed significant negative correlations with psychopathological symptoms.
Conclusions
This scale addresses a critical gap in clinical assessment tools for DBT and it holds promise for applications across mental disorders and social studies.
期刊介绍:
The European journal of psychiatry is a quarterly publication founded in 1986 and directed by Professor Seva until his death in 2004. It was originally intended to report “the scientific activity of European psychiatrists” and “to bring about a greater degree of communication” among them. However, “since scientific knowledge has no geographical or cultural boundaries, is open to contributions from all over the world”. These principles are maintained in the new stage of the journal, now expanded with the help of an American editor.