Journal of clinical psychology · 2026
The Psychometric Properties and Clinical Usefulness of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale in Forensic Settings.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meddeb Adam, Wallinius Märta, Berlin Johan, Laporte Natalie, Karlén Malin Hildebrand, Mazzeschi Claudia, Delvecchio Elisa, Velotti Patrizia, Garofalo Carlo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) is a widely used measure of emotion dysregulation across clinical contexts. However, its psychometric properties and clinical utility have not been thoroughly examined in forensic populations. This study evaluated the original 36-item DERS and two short forms, the DERS-16 and the DERS-8, in two independent forensic samples from two different countries: a forensic psychiatric inpatient sample (N = 88) and a prison sample (N = 389).
METHODS: Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess factor structure. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω, and construct validity was examined through correlations with aggression, externalizing psychopathology, impulsivity, mindfulness, and alexithymia.
RESULTS: The original six-factor model showed poor model fit, whereas data-model fit improved for the DERS-16 and DERS-8. The DERS total and subscale scores correlated meaningfully with measures of aggression, externalizing pathology, impulsivity, mindfulness, and alexithymia. However, DERS scores were not significantly associated with habitual use of specific emotion regulation strategies.
CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that the DERS-16 and DERS-8 may be preferable to the full 36-item scale in forensic settings, offering promising psychometric properties while minimizing patient burden. Beyond psychometric adequacy, the results provide clinically relevant insights into the feasibility and practical utility of DERS in forensic mental health settings.
METHODS: Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess factor structure. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω, and construct validity was examined through correlations with aggression, externalizing psychopathology, impulsivity, mindfulness, and alexithymia.
RESULTS: The original six-factor model showed poor model fit, whereas data-model fit improved for the DERS-16 and DERS-8. The DERS total and subscale scores correlated meaningfully with measures of aggression, externalizing pathology, impulsivity, mindfulness, and alexithymia. However, DERS scores were not significantly associated with habitual use of specific emotion regulation strategies.
CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that the DERS-16 and DERS-8 may be preferable to the full 36-item scale in forensic settings, offering promising psychometric properties while minimizing patient burden. Beyond psychometric adequacy, the results provide clinically relevant insights into the feasibility and practical utility of DERS in forensic mental health settings.