Cited by 15Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The structure of peritraumatic dissociation: A cross validation in clinical and nonclinical samples

Sijbrandij, Marit, Engelhard, Iris M., Opmeer, Brent C., van de Schoot, Rens, Carlier, Ingrid V. E., Gersons, Berthold P. R., Olff, Miranda·2012·Journal of Traumatic Stress

Abstract

Empirical data have challenged the unidimensionality of the Peritraumatic Dissociative Experiences Questionnaire (PDEQ), a widely used measure for peritraumatic dissociation. The aim of this study was to assess the factor structure of the PDEQ in 3 trauma‐exposed samples: (a) trauma‐exposed police officers (N = 219); (b) trauma‐exposed civilians (N = 158); and (c) treatment‐seeking trauma‐exposed civilians (N = 185). Confirmatory factor analyses using measurement invariance testing supported a 2‐factor structure (CFIs .96–.98; RMSEAs .07–.09), but excluded 2 of the original items. Factor 1 was termed Altered Awareness; Factor 2 was termed Derealization. Altered Awareness reflected disturbances in information processing during the traumatic event, whereas Derealization reflected distortions in perception. Hierarchical linear regression analysis showed that Derealization predicted posttraumatic stress severity at 26.5 weeks follow‐up only in the sample of police officers (R2 = .45). Future longitudinal research shortly following trauma is required to elucidate causality and underlying mechanisms of peritraumatic dissociation, which may contribute to the development of more accurate screening strategies, as well as more effective strategies for prevention and early intervention.<?vsp ‐3.25pt?>

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jts.21716

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sijbrandij, M., Engelhard, I. M., Opmeer, B. C., van de Schoot, R., Carlier, I. V. E., Gersons, B. P. R., & Olff, M.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
Corresponding author
Sijbrandij, Marit
Venue
Journal of Traumatic Stress
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-07-20
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
475-479
ISSN
  • 0894-9867 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6598
OpenAlex
W2151231306
Cited by
15
References
19
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Traumatic Stress (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
peritraumatic dissociation, factor structure, measurement invariance, derealization, post-traumatic stress disorder, police officers
MeSH terms
Adult, Awareness, Depersonalization, Dissociative Disorders, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Time Factors, Linear Models, Police, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review