Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Revised Beliefs About Emotions Questionnaire

IF 3.2 3区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical psychology & psychotherapy Pub Date : 2023-08-02 DOI:10.1002/cpp.2889

Esben Strodl, Mitchell Hubert, Myra Cooper

{"title":"Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Revised Beliefs About Emotions Questionnaire","authors":"Esben Strodl, Mitchell Hubert, Myra Cooper","doi":"10.1002/cpp.2889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Given that there is an increasing exploration of the role of beliefs about emotions in emotion regulation and psychotherapy, there is a need for a range of valid and reliable measures of beliefs about emotions. The Beliefs About Emotions Questionnaire (BAEQ) has been shown to be a promising measure of beliefs about emotions. However, to date, no study has attempted to replicate the original factor structure of the BAEQ in an English-speaking country. The present study examined the psychometric properties of the BAEQ in a nonclinical sample.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Archival data of 1807 adult participants residing in Australia was divided into three equal groups of participants. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on the first sub-sample, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the second sub-sample, and a second CFA was performed on the third sub-sample. Divergent validity was tested using the heterotrait–monotrait ratio and the concurrent validity was tested through correlations with the subscales of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ-R18).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The first CFA failed to replicate the original factor structure of the BAEQ. An EFA supported five of the original six factors. A five-factor structure, including 30 out of the original 43 items, was confirmed in a second CFA. The final subscales (Shameful and Irrational, Overwhelming and Uncontrollable, Invalid and Meaningless, Useless and Damaging) demonstrated good construct validity, good internal consistency, and good concurrent and divergent validity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The results from this study support a briefer five-factor, 30-item version of the BAEQ (BAEQ-R) as a reliable and valid measure of beliefs about emotions that can be utilised in future research.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"30 6","pages":"1471-1481"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cpp.2889","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.2889","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Given that there is an increasing exploration of the role of beliefs about emotions in emotion regulation and psychotherapy, there is a need for a range of valid and reliable measures of beliefs about emotions. The Beliefs About Emotions Questionnaire (BAEQ) has been shown to be a promising measure of beliefs about emotions. However, to date, no study has attempted to replicate the original factor structure of the BAEQ in an English-speaking country. The present study examined the psychometric properties of the BAEQ in a nonclinical sample.

Method

Archival data of 1807 adult participants residing in Australia was divided into three equal groups of participants. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on the first sub-sample, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the second sub-sample, and a second CFA was performed on the third sub-sample. Divergent validity was tested using the heterotrait–monotrait ratio and the concurrent validity was tested through correlations with the subscales of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ-R18).

Results

The first CFA failed to replicate the original factor structure of the BAEQ. An EFA supported five of the original six factors. A five-factor structure, including 30 out of the original 43 items, was confirmed in a second CFA. The final subscales (Shameful and Irrational, Overwhelming and Uncontrollable, Invalid and Meaningless, Useless and Damaging) demonstrated good construct validity, good internal consistency, and good concurrent and divergent validity.

Conclusion

The results from this study support a briefer five-factor, 30-item version of the BAEQ (BAEQ-R) as a reliable and valid measure of beliefs about emotions that can be utilised in future research.

查看原文本刊更多论文

修订版情绪信念问卷的心理计量特性和因素结构。

目的：鉴于人们越来越多地探讨情绪信念在情绪调节和心理治疗中的作用，因此需要一系列有效可靠的情绪信念测量方法。关于情绪的信念问卷（BAEQ）已被证明是一种很有前途的情绪信念测量方法。然而，迄今为止，还没有研究试图在英语国家复制 BAEQ 的原始因子结构。本研究考察了 BAEQ 在非临床样本中的心理测量特性：方法：将居住在澳大利亚的 1807 名成年参与者的档案数据分为三组，每组人数相等。对第一组子样本进行了确证性因子分析（CFA），对第二组子样本进行了探索性因子分析（EFA），对第三组子样本进行了第二次确证性因子分析。发散效度通过异质-单质比进行检验，并发效度通过与三因素进食问卷（TFEQ-R18）各分量表的相关性进行检验：第一个CFA未能复制BAEQ的原始因子结构。EFA支持了原来六个因子中的五个。第二次 CFA 确认了五因素结构，包括原始 43 个项目中的 30 个。最终的子量表（可耻和非理性、不堪重负和无法控制、无效和无意义、无用和破坏性）显示出良好的建构效度、良好的内部一致性以及良好的并发和发散效度：本研究的结果支持采用更简短的五因素、30 个项目的 BAEQ（BAEQ-R）作为可靠有效的情绪信念测量方法，可用于未来的研究中。

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

Clinical psychology & psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

6.30

自引率

5.60%

发文量

106

期刊介绍： Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy aims to keep clinical psychologists and psychotherapists up to date with new developments in their fields. The Journal will provide an integrative impetus both between theory and practice and between different orientations within clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy will be a forum in which practitioners can present their wealth of expertise and innovations in order to make these available to a wider audience. Equally, the Journal will contain reports from researchers who want to address a larger clinical audience with clinically relevant issues and clinically valid research.