Scale to measure dialectical thinking from dialectical behavior therapy perspective.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
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 ,&nbsp;Maria Arqueros ,&nbsp;Carlos Schmidt ,&nbsp;Daniela Otero ,&nbsp;Anna Soria-Madrid ,&nbsp;María José Campins ,&nbsp;Anna Catalan ,&nbsp;Elisabet Casellas ,&nbsp;Rocío Espeso ,&nbsp;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.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
43 days
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.
×
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