Cited by 22Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Research Topics

Expanding Research on Decentering as Measured by the Portuguese Version of the Experiences Questionnaire

Open access
Gregório, Sónia, Pinto-Gouveia, José, Duarte, Cristiana, Simões, Luís·2015·The Spanish Journal of Psychology

Abstract

For long decentering has been regarded as a crucial process for well-being and health. Thus, reliable measures are needed to assess decentering. This study aimed at examining the psychometric characteristics of the Portuguese version of the Experiences Questionnaire (EQ), and to contribute to gather new evidence on the role of this particular measure of decentering on the well-known relationship between rumination and depressive symptoms. The EQ factorial structure was assessed through a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) conducted in 709 participants (66% women; 34% men). CFA’ results supported a 10-item solution (χ 2/df = 2.62; CFI = .96; TLI = .95; RMSEA = .05, CI = .04 to .06) with high internal consistency (α = .81), test-retest reliability (r = .86; p < .010) and construct validity. Two path analyses were further conducted in a subsample exploring the indirect effect of rumination on depression through the mechanism of decentering as assessed by the specific measure of EQ, and by the non-specific measure of decentering TMS. Decentering, only when measured by EQ, significantly emerged as a mechanism through which the relationship between rumination and depressive symptoms also operates (R2 = .22). Findings highlight the importance of using EQ as a specific measure of this transdiagnostic process in research and clinical settings.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/sjp.2015.18

Cites

65 of 65 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
Gregório, S., Pinto-Gouveia, J., Duarte, C., & Simões, L.
Affiliations
University of Coimbra (PT)
Corresponding author
Gregório, Sónia
Venue
The Spanish Journal of Psychology
Published
2015
Volume
18
Pages
E23-E23
ISSN
  • 1138-7416 (ISSN-L)
  • 1988-2904
OpenAlex
W1976756184
Cited by
22
References
65
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 2
FWCI
2.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Spanish Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion)
  • Research at York St John (York St John University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (SFRH/BD/40290/2007, SFRH/BD/76858/2011)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
decentering, rumination, depressive symptoms, depression, psychometric validation, Portuguese version, transdiagnostic mechanisms, mediation, well-being
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Depression, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Portugal, Psychological Tests, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Thinking, Reproducibility of Results, 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