Cargando…

Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 (CAS-1) questionnaire. METHODS: 221 participants were included in the study who do not meet any psychiatric diagnosis. Participants were applied SCID I and II and filled CA...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gündüz, Anıl, Gündoğmus, İbrahim, Sertçelik, Sencan, Engin, Betül Hacer, İşler, Aysel, Çipil, Arif, Gönül, Hatice, Yaşar, Alişan Burak, Sungur, Mehmet Zihni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Neuropsychiatric Association 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6539268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31132839
http://dx.doi.org/10.30773/pi.2019.02.11.1
_version_ 1783422346489495552
author Gündüz, Anıl
Gündoğmus, İbrahim
Sertçelik, Sencan
Engin, Betül Hacer
İşler, Aysel
Çipil, Arif
Gönül, Hatice
Yaşar, Alişan Burak
Sungur, Mehmet Zihni
author_facet Gündüz, Anıl
Gündoğmus, İbrahim
Sertçelik, Sencan
Engin, Betül Hacer
İşler, Aysel
Çipil, Arif
Gönül, Hatice
Yaşar, Alişan Burak
Sungur, Mehmet Zihni
author_sort Gündüz, Anıl
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 (CAS-1) questionnaire. METHODS: 221 participants were included in the study who do not meet any psychiatric diagnosis. Participants were applied SCID I and II and filled CAS-1 scale, Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) Scale, and Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ). Testing the reliability Cronbach’s alpha, item analysis and Item and total score correlation coefficients were applied. For testing structural validity, Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used, and for testing the content validity, the relationship between each item of CAS-1 and MCQ-30, BDI, BAI, GAD-7, PSWQ was examined. RESULTS: The correlation reliability coefficients were statistically significant except for using alcohol/drugs as a coping mechanism. Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of 16 items was 0.771 whereas, this ratio was 0.772 for the first eight items (CAS) and 0.685 for the last eight items (Metacognitive Beliefs) which showed that the internal consistency of CAS-1 was high. Structural and Content Validity of the scale was significant. CONCLUSION: The Turkish version of the CAS-1 was a reliable and valid measure to evaluate CAS in a Turkish population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6539268
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Korean Neuropsychiatric Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65392682019-06-04 Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire Gündüz, Anıl Gündoğmus, İbrahim Sertçelik, Sencan Engin, Betül Hacer İşler, Aysel Çipil, Arif Gönül, Hatice Yaşar, Alişan Burak Sungur, Mehmet Zihni Psychiatry Investig Original Article OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 (CAS-1) questionnaire. METHODS: 221 participants were included in the study who do not meet any psychiatric diagnosis. Participants were applied SCID I and II and filled CAS-1 scale, Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) Scale, and Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ). Testing the reliability Cronbach’s alpha, item analysis and Item and total score correlation coefficients were applied. For testing structural validity, Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used, and for testing the content validity, the relationship between each item of CAS-1 and MCQ-30, BDI, BAI, GAD-7, PSWQ was examined. RESULTS: The correlation reliability coefficients were statistically significant except for using alcohol/drugs as a coping mechanism. Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of 16 items was 0.771 whereas, this ratio was 0.772 for the first eight items (CAS) and 0.685 for the last eight items (Metacognitive Beliefs) which showed that the internal consistency of CAS-1 was high. Structural and Content Validity of the scale was significant. CONCLUSION: The Turkish version of the CAS-1 was a reliable and valid measure to evaluate CAS in a Turkish population. Korean Neuropsychiatric Association 2019-05 2019-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6539268/ /pubmed/31132839 http://dx.doi.org/10.30773/pi.2019.02.11.1 Text en Copyright © 2019 Korean Neuropsychiatric Association This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gündüz, Anıl
Gündoğmus, İbrahim
Sertçelik, Sencan
Engin, Betül Hacer
İşler, Aysel
Çipil, Arif
Gönül, Hatice
Yaşar, Alişan Burak
Sungur, Mehmet Zihni
Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire
title Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire
title_full Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire
title_fullStr Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire
title_full_unstemmed Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire
title_short Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire
title_sort validity and reliability of cognitive attentional syndrome-1 questionnaire
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6539268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31132839
http://dx.doi.org/10.30773/pi.2019.02.11.1
work_keys_str_mv AT gunduzanıl validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT gundogmusibrahim validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT sertceliksencan validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT enginbetulhacer validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT isleraysel validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT cipilarif validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT gonulhatice validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT yasaralisanburak validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire
AT sungurmehmetzihni validityandreliabilityofcognitiveattentionalsyndrome1questionnaire