| Title |
Measuring Cognitive Errors Using the Cognitive Distortions Scale (CDS): Psychometric Properties in Clinical and Non-Clinical Samples
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0105956 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kadir Özdel, Ibrahim Taymur, Seher Olga Guriz, Riza Gökcer Tulaci, Erkan Kuru, Mehmet Hakan Turkcapar |
| Abstract |
The Cognitive Distortions Scale was developed to assess thinking errors using case examples in two domains: interpersonal and personal achievement. Although its validity and reliability has been previously demonstrated in non-clinical samples, its psychometric properties and scoring has not yet been evaluated. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Cognitive Distortions Scale in two Turkish samples and to examine the usefulness of the categorical scoring system. A total of 325 individuals (Sample 1 and Sample 2) were enrolled in this study to assess those psychometric properties. Our Sample 1 consisted of 225 individuals working as interns at the Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Teaching and Research Hospital and Sample 2 consisted of 100 patients diagnosed with depression presenting to the outpatient unit of the same Hospital. Construct validity was assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory, the State Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale, and the Automatic Thought Questionnaire. Factor analyses supported a one-factor model in these clinical and non-clinical samples. Cronbach's α values were excellent in both the non-clinical and clinical samples (0.933 and 0.918 respectively). Cognitive Distortions Scale scores showed significant correlation with relevant clinical measures. Study Cognitive Distortions Scale scores were stable over a time span of two weeks. This study showed that the Cognitive Distortions Scale is a valid and reliable measure in clinical and non-clinical populations. In addition, it shows that the categorical exists/does not exist scoring system is relevant and could be used in clinical settings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Turkey | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 93 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 17% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 26 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 41 | 43% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 26 | 27% |