Psychometric evaluation of the Kessler 10 measure of psychosocial distress using the 2022 South African population-based household survey.

IF 2.7 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Current Psychology Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-05-30 DOI:10.1007/s12144-026-09563-y
Sbonelo Chamane, Musawenkosi Mabaso, Ronel Sewpaul, Lehlogonolo Makola, Sean Jooste, Sizulu Moyo, Nobuhle Mchunu, Yusentha Balakrishna, Nompumelelo Zungu, Olive Shisana, Khangelani Zuma
{"title":"Psychometric evaluation of the Kessler 10 measure of psychosocial distress using the 2022 South African population-based household survey.","authors":"Sbonelo Chamane, Musawenkosi Mabaso, Ronel Sewpaul, Lehlogonolo Makola, Sean Jooste, Sizulu Moyo, Nobuhle Mchunu, Yusentha Balakrishna, Nompumelelo Zungu, Olive Shisana, Khangelani Zuma","doi":"10.1007/s12144-026-09563-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) is widely used in epidemiological research but requires validation within South Africa's multilingual setting. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the K10 using national population-based survey data and Item Response Theory (IRT). Graded Response Models (GRM) were used to assess factor loadings, item discrimination, and difficulty parameters, while Test Information Curves evaluated measurement precision across the distress continuum. Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analysis examined language effects, supporting cross-group reliability. All items exhibited high factor loadings (0.86-0.96) and substantial communalities (> 0.74) in the unidimensional GRM. Although the multidimensional GRM showed marginal improvement, relatively low factor loadings limited its suitability. All items had high discrimination parameters, ranging from 2.89 (K1) to 5.78 (K6). Difficulty parameters (β1-β4) followed the expected increasing pattern across response categories. Items K6 and K9 were the most informative given by the highest discrimination values. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's Omega total = 0.95), while marginal reliability under the unidimensional IRT model was moderate (0.65). Items 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10 were flagged for possible DIF by English-speaking status; effect sizes were negligible (R² < 0.002). This study provides robust evidence supporting the psychometric soundness of the K10 in a South African context. The scale functions as a unidimensional, internally consistent, and discriminating measure of psychological distress. Marginal reliability and information curves indicate it is most precise for detecting moderate-to-high distress levels, with potential for refinement in screening for milder symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":48075,"journal":{"name":"Current Psychology","volume":"45 10","pages":"1021"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13222254/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-026-09563-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) is widely used in epidemiological research but requires validation within South Africa's multilingual setting. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the K10 using national population-based survey data and Item Response Theory (IRT). Graded Response Models (GRM) were used to assess factor loadings, item discrimination, and difficulty parameters, while Test Information Curves evaluated measurement precision across the distress continuum. Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analysis examined language effects, supporting cross-group reliability. All items exhibited high factor loadings (0.86-0.96) and substantial communalities (> 0.74) in the unidimensional GRM. Although the multidimensional GRM showed marginal improvement, relatively low factor loadings limited its suitability. All items had high discrimination parameters, ranging from 2.89 (K1) to 5.78 (K6). Difficulty parameters (β1-β4) followed the expected increasing pattern across response categories. Items K6 and K9 were the most informative given by the highest discrimination values. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's Omega total = 0.95), while marginal reliability under the unidimensional IRT model was moderate (0.65). Items 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10 were flagged for possible DIF by English-speaking status; effect sizes were negligible (R² < 0.002). This study provides robust evidence supporting the psychometric soundness of the K10 in a South African context. The scale functions as a unidimensional, internally consistent, and discriminating measure of psychological distress. Marginal reliability and information curves indicate it is most precise for detecting moderate-to-high distress levels, with potential for refinement in screening for milder symptoms.

使用2022年南非人口为基础的家庭调查对凯斯勒10测量心理社会困扰的心理测量学评估。
Kessler心理困扰量表(K10)广泛用于流行病学研究,但需要在南非的多语言环境中进行验证。本研究利用全国人口调查数据和项目反应理论(IRT)评估了K10的心理测量特性。分级反应模型(GRM)用于评估因素负荷、项目辨别和难度参数,而测试信息曲线评估整个痛苦连续体的测量精度。差异项目功能(DIF)分析检验了语言效应,支持跨组信度。在单维GRM中,所有项目均表现出较高的因子负荷(0.86 ~ 0.96)和较大的群落(> 0.74)。多维GRM虽有边际改善,但因子负荷较低限制了其适用性。所有条目的识别参数均较高,范围为2.89 (K1) ~ 5.78 (K6)。难度参数(β1-β4)在各反应类别中均符合预期的增加模式。项目K6和K9的信息量最大,辨别值最高。内部一致性极好(Cronbach’s alpha和McDonald’s Omega total = 0.95),而单维IRT模型下的边际信度为中等(0.65)。第4、5、7、8和10项被英语国家标记为可能的DIF;效应量可以忽略不计(R²< 0.002)。本研究提供了强有力的证据,支持南非背景下K10的心理测量健全性。该量表是一种单向度的、内部一致的、有区别的心理困扰测量方法。边际可靠性和信息曲线表明,对于检测中度至高度的痛苦程度,它是最精确的,在筛查较轻的症状方面有改进的潜力。
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
Current Psychology
Current Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.70%
发文量
1412
期刊介绍: Current Psychology is an international forum for rapid dissemination of peer-reviewed research at the cutting edge of psychology. It welcomes significant and rigorous empirical and theoretical contributions from all the major areas of psychology, including but not limited to: cognitive psychology and cognition, social, clinical, health, developmental, methodological, and personality psychology, neuropsychology, psychometrics, human factors, and educational psychology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书