Cited by 44Psychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Using the De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale With Early Adolescents: Factor Structure, Reliability, Stability, and External Validity

Open access
Grygiel, Paweł, Humenny, Grzegorz, Rębisz, Sławomir·2019·Assessment

Abstract

The present investigation is the first examination of the factor structures, reliability, external validity, longitudinal invariance, and stability of the De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale (DJGLS), as used with early adolescents. It is based on a two-wave, large, representative sample of Polish primary school pupils. The results demonstrate that the model most reflective of the factor structure of the DJGLS is the bifactor model, which assumes the occurrence of one, highly reliable, general factor (overall sense of loneliness) and two, relatively irrelevant, subfactors. Essential unidimensionality (the general factor accounting for three fourth of the common variance) suggest that the interpretation of the subfactors over and above the general factor is inappropriate. The longitudinal confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the bifactor structure of the DJGLS is invariant over time. Correlations with self-rated loneliness, sociometric acceptance/rejection, social self-efficacy, identification with class group, family structure, and gender provide support for the validity of the DJGLS. This implies that it could be used as a measure of loneliness in adolescence, which does not involve references to the school context, making it possible to conduct studies that go beyond school period and compare the intensity of the feeling of loneliness in that group with other age groups.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1073191116682298

Cites

121 of 121 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
Grygiel, P., Humenny, G., & Rębisz, S.
Affiliations
  • Educational Research Institute – National Research Institute (PL)
  • Jagiellonian University (PL)
  • University of Rzeszów (PL)
Corresponding author
Grygiel, Paweł
Venue
Assessment
Published
2016-12-08
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
151-165
ISSN
  • 1073-1911 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3489
OpenAlex
W2560395880
Cited by
44
References
121
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Homo Politicus (Academy of Humanities and Economics in Lodz) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • 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
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale, loneliness, early adolescents, factor structure, bifactor model, longitudinal measurement invariance, reliability statistics, generalizability, social self-efficacy, family structure, gender differences, elementary school students
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Educational Status, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Loneliness, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Parents, Peer Group, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Factors, Social Identification, Reproducibility of Results, Self Efficacy, Single-Parent Family

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