Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij Scalda & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Scalda heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen.Je kunt de producten hieronder links aanschaffen en rechts inloggen.

» Andere revante producten voor Scalda studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Schaf de BSL Academy aan: 

BSL Academy mbo AG

Eenmaal aangeschaft kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met Jan van der Velden.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment
Gepubliceerd in:

05-08-2024

Validation of the French Versions of the Context-Sensitivity Index (CSI) and the Flexible Regulation of Emotional Expression Scale (FREE)

Auteurs: Carla Nardelli, Marine Paucsik, Luisa Weiner, George A. Bonanno, Catherine Bortolon

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment | Uitgave 3/2024

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Emotion regulation (ER) flexibility is defined as the ability to match ER strategies to situational demands. Several components of flexibility have been identified, such as the ability to detect the presence or absence of contextual cues (i.e., context-sensitivity), the ability to use flexibly diverse strategies (i.e., repertoire), and the ability to monitor and adapt strategies (i.e., feedback). The goal of this study was to validate French versions of the Context-Sensitivity Index (CSI) and the Flexible Regulation of Emotional Expression (FREE) scale. This online study comprised questionnaires designed to analyse the psychometric properties of the two questionnaires in a French population (N = 397). Both scales show satisfactory internal consistency (with ω = 0.81 for the FREE), convergent validity and acceptable test-retest validity (with 0.81 for the FREE; 0.71 for the CSI). Our findings support the hierarchical and four-dimension structures of the FREE scale, with all approximate fit indices demonstrating adequate model fit (CFI = 0.94; RMSEA = 0.05; Chi-square = 1450.656, df = 120, p < .001). Common limits of self-reported measures are associated with this study. Moreover, our results should be replicated in future studies. The French versions of the CSI and FREE scale can be considered as adequate instruments for assessing context-sensitivity and repertoire as components of ER flexibility.
vorige artikel Evaluation of the Modified Social Anxiety Questionnaire for Children: Exploring Psychometrics of a More Inclusive Measure
volgende artikel Body Appreciation Protects Against Proximal Self-Harm Urges in a Clinical Sample of Adults
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
Aldao, A., & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2010). Specificity of cognitive emotion regulation strategies: A transdiagnostic examination. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 48(10), 974–983.
Aldao, A., Sheppes, G., & Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation flexibility. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 39, 263–278.CrossRef
Bohus, M., Limberger, M. F., Frank, U., Chapman, A. L., Kühler, T., & Stieglitz, R. D. (2007). Psychometric properties of the borderline symptom list (BSL). Psychopathology, 40, 126–132.CrossRefPubMed
Bonanno, G. A., & Burton, C. L. (2013). Regulatory flexibility: An individual differences perspective on coping and emotion regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 591–612.CrossRefPubMed
Bonanno, G. A., Papa, A., Lalande, K., Westphal, M., & Coifman, K. (2004). The importance of being flexible: The ability to both enhance and suppress emotional expression predicts long-term adjustment. Psychological Science, 15, 482–487.CrossRefPubMed
Bonanno, G. A., Maccallum, F., Malgaroli, M., & Hou, W. K. (2020). The Context Sensitivity Index (CSI): Measuring the ability to identify the presence and absence of stressor context cues. Assessment, 27, 261–273.CrossRefPubMed
Bortolon, C., Chen, S., & Bonanno, G. A. (2023). Components of emotion regulation flexibility and psychosis: The association between psychosis‐proneness and context sensitivity. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(1), 82–95.
Browne, M. W. (1993). Structured latent curve models. Multivariate analysis: Future directions 2 (pp. 171–197). Elsevier.
Burton, C. L., & Bonanno, G. A. (2016). Measuring ability to enhance and suppress emotional expression: The flexible regulation of emotional expression (FREE) scale. Psychological Assessment, 28, 929–941.CrossRefPubMed
Carpenter, R. W., & Trull, T. J. (2013). Components of emotion dysregulation in borderline personality disorder: A review. Current Psychiatry Reports, 15, 1–8.
Chapman, A. L., Rosenthal, M. Z., & Leung, D. W. (2009). Emotion suppression in borderline personality disorder: An experience sampling study. Journal of Personality Disorders, 23, 29–47.CrossRefPubMed
Chen, S., & Bonanno, G. A. (2021). Components of emotion regulation flexibility: Linking latent profiles to depressive and anxious symptoms. Clinical Psychological Science, 9, 236–251.CrossRef
Chen, S., Chen, T., & Bonanno, G. A. (2018). Expressive flexibility: Enhancement and suppression abilities differentially predict life satisfaction and psychopathology symptoms. Personality and Individual Differences, 126, 78–84. (2018-06923-015).CrossRef
Chen, S., Burton, C. L., & Bonanno, G. A. (2020). The suppression paradox: A cross-cultural comparison of suppression frequency, suppression ability, and depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 274, 183–189.CrossRefPubMed
Cherry, K. M., Hoeven, E. V., Patterson, T. S., & Lumley, M. N. (2021). Defining and measuring psychological flexibility: A narrative scoping review of diverse flexibility and rigidity constructs and perspectives. Clinical Psychology Review, 84, 101973.CrossRefPubMed
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.CrossRef
Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105, 399–412.CrossRefPubMed
Flora, D. B. (2020). Your coefficient alpha is probably wrong, but which coefficient omega is right? A tutorial on using R to obtain better reliability estimates. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3, 484–501.CrossRef
Grandey, A. A., Fisk, G. M., & Steiner, D. D. (2005). Must service with a smile be stressful? The moderating role of personal control for American and French employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 893.CrossRefPubMed
Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 348.CrossRefPubMed
Gupta, S., & Bonanno, G. A. (2011). Complicated grief and deficits in emotional expressive flexibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 120, 635–643.CrossRefPubMed
Hochberg, Y., & Benjamini, Y. (1990). More powerful procedures for multiple significance testing. Statistics in Medicine, 9, 811–818.CrossRefPubMed
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.CrossRef
Ishii, K., Reyes, J. A., & Kitayama, S. (2003). Spontaneous attention to word content versus emotional tone: Differences among three cultures. Psychological Science, 14(1), 39–46.CrossRefPubMed
Kalokerinos, E., & Koval, P. (2022). Emotion regulation flexibility.
Kato, T. (2012). Development of the coping flexibility scale: Evidence for the coping flexibility hypothesis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 262.CrossRefPubMed
Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507.
Kobylińska, D., & Kusev, P. (2019). Flexible emotion regulation: How situational demands and Individual Differences Influence the Effectiveness of Regulatory Strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression anxiety stress scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and anxiety inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 335–343.CrossRefPubMed
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130.
Matsumoto, D., Yoo, S. H., & Fontaine, J. (2008). Mapping expressive differences around the world: The relationship between emotional display rules and individualism versus collectivism. J Cross Cult Psychol, 39, 55–74.CrossRef
McDonald, R. P. (1981). The dimensionality of tests and items. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 100–117.CrossRef
McRae, K., Jacobs, S. E., Ray, R. D., John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2012). Individual differences in reappraisal ability: Links to reappraisal frequency, well-being, and cognitive control. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 2–7.CrossRef
Mesquita, B., & Walker, R. (2003). Cultural differences in emotions: A context for interpreting emotional experiences. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(7), 777–793.CrossRefPubMed
Nardelli, C., Bonanno, G. A., Chen, S., & Bortolon, C. (2024). Emotion regulation flexibility and psychosis: A longitudinal study disentangling components of flexibility in psychosis-proneness. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63(1), 54–72.CrossRefPubMed
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Wisco, B. E., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). Rethinking rumination. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 400–424.CrossRefPubMed
Park, D. C., & Huang, C. M. (2010). Culture wires the brain: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 391–400.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: A clear and user-friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17, 268–274.CrossRefPubMed
Team, R. C. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing.
Van De Schoot, R., Schmidt, P., De Beuckelaer, A., Lek, K., & Zondervan-Zwijnenburg, M. (2015). Measurement invariance. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1064.PubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Validation of the French Versions of the Context-Sensitivity Index (CSI) and the Flexible Regulation of Emotional Expression Scale (FREE)
Auteurs
Carla Nardelli
Marine Paucsik
Luisa Weiner
George A. Bonanno
Catherine Bortolon
Publicatiedatum
05-08-2024
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment / Uitgave 3/2024
Print ISSN: 0882-2689
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-3505
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-024-10161-0

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2024

Feeling, Caring, Knowing Revisited: Three Components of Empathy and Psychopathic and Autistic Traits

A Network Analysis of GAD, MDD, and OCD: Symptom Overlap and Shared Risk/Maintenance Factors

The Youth Sheehan Disability Scale: A Psychometric Evaluation

Training Gains and Losses: Their Link with Treatment Effects of Attention Bias Modification for Anxiety

Psychometric Evaluation of the Metacognitions Questionnaire – Short Form (MCQ-30) in Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Reliability, Validity and Utility in a Clinical Sample

  • Open Access

Within-Person Variation in Negative Urgency Predicts Near-Term Interpersonal Stress