TY - JOUR
T1 - Meta-Analysis of the Factor Structures of the Beck Depression Inventory–II
AU - Huang, Chiungjung
AU - Chen, Jyun Hong
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was funded by National Science Council of the Republic of China, Taiwan under Grant No. NSC 101-2410-H-018-017.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2014.
PY - 2015/8/21
Y1 - 2015/8/21
N2 - Two meta-analyses examined the factor structure of the Beck Depression Inventory–II (BDI-II). Study 1, which meta-analyzed 51 studies comprising 62 samples (N = 20,475) providing pattern matrices, determined that the two-factor solution comprising Cognitive and Somatic-Affective factors was supported for the full sample. The two-factor solution was also supported for subgroups of studies. As the factor structure varied somewhat between subgroups of studies, the strength of relationships between scale items and their underlying depressive symptoms varied. Hence, comparisons of mean BDI-II scores across subgroups can be misleading. Study 2 meta-analyzed 13 studies consisting of 16 samples (N = 5,128) providing covariance matrices among the 21 BDI-II items. The two-factor solution was again supported in Study 2. Nevertheless, the existence of a general depression factor was supported by the good fit of the one-factor model.
AB - Two meta-analyses examined the factor structure of the Beck Depression Inventory–II (BDI-II). Study 1, which meta-analyzed 51 studies comprising 62 samples (N = 20,475) providing pattern matrices, determined that the two-factor solution comprising Cognitive and Somatic-Affective factors was supported for the full sample. The two-factor solution was also supported for subgroups of studies. As the factor structure varied somewhat between subgroups of studies, the strength of relationships between scale items and their underlying depressive symptoms varied. Hence, comparisons of mean BDI-II scores across subgroups can be misleading. Study 2 meta-analyzed 13 studies consisting of 16 samples (N = 5,128) providing covariance matrices among the 21 BDI-II items. The two-factor solution was again supported in Study 2. Nevertheless, the existence of a general depression factor was supported by the good fit of the one-factor model.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937213986&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937213986&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1073191114548873
DO - 10.1177/1073191114548873
M3 - Article
C2 - 25172846
AN - SCOPUS:84937213986
VL - 22
SP - 459
EP - 472
JO - Assessment
JF - Assessment
SN - 1073-1911
IS - 4
ER -