Cited by 1,036Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale

Parker, James D.A, Taylor, Graeme J, Bagby, R.Michael·2003·Journal of Psychosomatic Research

Abstract

Objective Some researchers have questioned the stability of the three-factor structure of the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) or the reliability of one or more factors of the scale. The aim of this study was to assess the replicability of the factor structure of the TAS-20 in a large community sample and to determine also whether the same three-factor structure can be recovered in men and women. The study also assessed the reliability of the scale and the influence of gender, age, and education on TAS-20 scores.Method The TAS-20 was administered to 1933 adults (880 men and 1053 women) residing in several small cities and towns in Ontario, Canada. The factor structure of the scale was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).Results The three-factor structure of the TAS-20 was replicable in the entire community sample and also separately in men and women. The TAS-20 and its three factors demonstrated internal reliability, and the variables of gender, age, and education accounted for relatively small or modest amounts of variability in total TAS-20 and factor scale scores.Conclusion The results provide strong support for the reliability and factorial validity of the TAS-20 and indicate the importance of using CFA when assessing the replicability and theoretical integrity of the factor structure of the scale.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-3999(02)00578-0

Cites

76 of 76 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
Parker, J. D. A., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M.
Affiliations
  • Trent University (CA)
  • Mount Sinai Hospital (CA)
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
Corresponding author
Taylor, Graeme J
Venue
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-09
Volume
55
Issue
3
Pages
269-275
ISSN
0022-3999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2129478806
Cited by
1,036
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 60 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 60 · 2014: 65 · 2013: 59 · 2012: 47
FWCI
13.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Psychosomatic Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Government of Ontario
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
Toronto Alexithymia Scale, alexithymia, factor structure, factorial validity, scale reliability, gender differences, age differences, educational attainment, community-dwelling adults
MeSH terms
Adult, Affective Symptoms, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Reference Values, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results

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