Cited by 61Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Assessment of the revised Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scales among adolescents and adults with severe mental illness

Open access
Charak, Ruby, Byllesby, Brianna M., Fowler, J. Christopher, Sharp, Carla, Elhai, Jon D., Frueh, B. Christopher·2019·Psychiatry Research

Abstract

The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) comprising 36 items has been widely used across age, gender, psychopathology, language, and culture. Recently several alternative abridged forms have been introduced, namely, the DERS-16 (Bjureberg et al. 2016), the DERS-SF (Kaufman et al. 2016), and the DERS-18 (Victor and Klonsky, 2016), each composed of 16 or 18 items, to provide researchers and clinicians with a shorter measure of emotion dysregulation. However, no study to date has directly compared the psychometrics of these alternative forms. In the present study, using confirmatory factor analysis we first examined the factor structure of the four models of the DERS in two inpatient samples of 636 adolescents in the age-range of 12-17 years (M = 15.33, SD = 1.43), and 1807 adults in the age-range of 18-76 years (M = 34.86, SD = 14.63) with severe mental illness. Next, measurement invariance was tested comparing the two age groups across the four models of DERS. Only the DERS-SF established metric and scalar measurement invariance. Findings suggest that the factor structure of the original and the abridged models of DERS have acceptable fit, however only DERS-SF had equivalence of factor loadings and item intercepts across adolescents and adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psychres.2019.04.010

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Charak, R., Byllesby, B. M., Fowler, J. C., Sharp, C., Elhai, J. D., & Frueh, B. C.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (US)
  • Summa Health System (US)
  • Houston Methodist (US)
  • University of Houston (US)
  • University of Toledo (US)
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
Corresponding author
Charak, Ruby
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-09
Volume
279
Pages
278-283
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2939192625
Cited by
61
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
5.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarWorks @ UTRGV (The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale, emotional dysregulation, factor structure, measurement invariance, adolescents, adults, severe mental illness, psychometrics
MeSH terms
Emotional Regulation, Adolescent, Adult, Affective Symptoms, Aged, Mental Disorders, Child, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychometrics, 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