Validity and Reliability Study of the Turkish Adaptation The Certainty About Mental States Questionnaire (CAMSQ)

Year 2024, Volume: 53 Issue: 1, 398 - 422, 30.04.2024

Feyruz Usluoglu Ece Bülbül Resul Çakır

https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.1418303

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Turkish version of The Certainty About Mental States Questionnaire (CAMSQ). The study was conducted with 565 participants (392 women and 173 men) aged 18 and 65 from non-clinical Turkish-speaking adults. The participants were administered the Cognitive Empathy Scale of Affective and Cognitive Measure of Empathy Scale (ACME-COG), the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ-6), and the Mentalization Scale (MentS). The concordance between the two-factor structure predicted in CAMSQ was examined with confirmatory factor analysis. The Turkish version also confirmed the analysis results, the number of items, and the two-factor structure (Self-Certainty and Other-Certainty) in the original form of the scale. There is a positive correlation between the sub-dimensions of CAMSQ and ACME-COG (0.502

Keywords

Mentalizing, Validation, Reliability, Self-report

Ethical Statement

Dosyalar bölümünde eklenmiştir.

Zihinsel Durumları Belirleme Ölçeği’nin (ZDBÖ) Türkçe Uyarlamasının Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı Zihinsel Durumları Belirleme Ölçeği'nin (ZDBÖ) uyarlamasının psikometrik özelliklerini incelemektir. Araştırma, Türkçe konuşan 18-65 yaş aralığındaki 565 (392 kadın ve 173 erkek) yetişkin katılımcıyla yürütülmüştür. Katılımcılara ZDBÖ, Duygusal ve Bilişsel Empati Ölçeği Bilişsel Empati alt boyutu (ACME-COG) Yansıtıcı İşleyiş Ölçeği (RFQ-6) ve Zihinselleştirme Ölçeği (MentS) uygulanmıştır. ZDBÖ’nün faktör yapısının incelenmesi amacı ile Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi yürütülmüştür. Analiz sonuçları, ölçeğin orijinal formundaki madde sayısı ve iki faktörlü yapı (Öz-Belirleme ve Diğerini-Belirleme) Türkçe versiyonunda da doğrulanmıştır. ZDBÖ’nün alt boyutları ile ACME-COG arasında pozitif yönde, orta düzeyde (0.502

Keywords

Zihinselleştirme, Güvenirlik, Geçerlik, Öz bildirim

References

• Allen, J. G. (2003). Mentalizing. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 67(2), 91–112. https://doi.org/10.1521/bumc.67.2.91.23440
• Allen, J. G., Fonagy, P., ve Bateman, A. W. (2008). Mentalizing in clinical practice. American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.
• Badoud, D., Luyten, P., Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Eliez, S., Fonagy, P., ve Debbané, M. (2015). The french version of the reflective functioning questionnaire: Validity data for adolescents and adults and ıts association with non-suicidal self-ınjury. PLOS ONE, 10(12), e0145892. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145892
• Ballespí, S., Nonweiler, J., Sharp, C., Vives, J., & Barrantes‐Vidal, N. (2022). Self‐but not other‐mentalizing moderates the association between BPD symptoms and somatic complaints in community‐dwelling adolescents. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 95(4), 905-920. https://doi.org/10.1111/papt.12409
• Ballespí, S., Vives, J., Sharp, C., Chanes, L., ve Barrantes-Vidal, N. (2021). Self and other mentalizing polarities and dimensions of mental health: Association with types of symptoms, functioning and well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(115). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.566254
• Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., ve Plumb, I. (2001). The “Reading the mind in the Eyes” test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 42(2), 241–251.
• Bateman, A., ve Fonagy, P. (2016). Mentalization based treatment for personality disorders: A practical guide (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000310-011
• Belvederi Murri, M., Ferrigno, G., Penati, S., Muzio, C., Piccinini, G., Innamorati, M., Ricci, F., Pompili, M., ve Amore, M. (2017). Mentalization and depressive symptoms in a clinical sample of adolescents and young adults. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 22(2), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12195
• Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2004). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS 12 and 13: A Guide for Social Scientists (1st ed.). Routledge
• Buyukozturk, S. (2016). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı istatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
• Chung, Y. S., Barch, D., ve Strube, M. (2014). A meta-analysis of mentalizing impairments in adults with schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorder. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 40(3), 602–616. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbt048
• Di Stefano, G., Piacentino, B., ve Ruvolo, G. (2017). Mentalizing in organizations: A psychodynamic model for an understanding of well-being and suffering in the work contexts. World Futures, 73(4–5), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/02604027.2017.1333851
• Dimitrijević, A., Hanak, N., Altaras Dimitrijević, A., ve Jolić Marjanović, Z. (2018). The Mentalization Scale (MentS): A self-report measure for the assessment of mentalizing capacity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(3), 268–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2017.1310730
• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
• Fonagy, P., Target, M., Steele, H., ve Steele, M. (1998). Reflective-Functioning manual (Version 5) for application to adult attachment interviews. Unpublished manual. Psychoanalysis Unit, Sub-Department of Clinical Health Psychology.
• Fonagy, P., ve Bateman, A. W. (2012). Introduction. In A. W. Bateman ve P. Fonagy (Eds.) Handbook of mentalizing in mental health practice (1st ed., pp. 3-20,). Amer Psychiatric Pub.
• Fonagy, Peter, Gergely, G., Jurist, E., ve Target, M. (2018). Affect regulation, mentalization and the development of the self (pp. 5-25). Routledge.
• Fonagy, Peter, Luyten, P., Moulton-Perkins, A., Lee, Y.-W., Warren, F., Howard, S., Ghinai, R., Fearon, P., ve Lowyck, B. (2016). Development and validation of a self-report measure of mentalizing: The reflective functioning questionnaire. Plos One, 11(7), e0158678. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158678
• Gori, A., Arcioni, A., Topino, E., Craparo, G., ve Lauro Grotto, R. (2021). Development of a new measure for assessing mentalizing: The multidimensional mentalizing questionnaire (MMQ). Journal of Personalized Medicine, 11(4), 305. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11040305
• Hausberg, M. C., Schulz, H., Piegler, T., Happach, C. G., Klöpper, M., Brütt, A. L., Sammet, I., ve Andreas, S. (2012). Is a self-rated instrument appropriate to assess mentalization in patients with mental disorders? Development and first validation of the Mentalization Questionnaire (MZQ). Psychotherapy Research, 22(6), 699–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2012.709325
• Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press.
• Köber, C., Kuhn, M. M., Peters, I., ve Habermas, T. (2019). Mentalizing oneself: Detecting reflective functioning in life narratives. Attachment ve Human Development, 21(4), 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2018.1473886
• Küçükkambak, S. E., & Armağan, E. (2022). Çevrimiçi ve yüz yüze anket teknikleri ile toplanan verilerin geçerlilik ve güvenilirliklerinin incelenmesi. Aksaray Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(4), 397-410. https://doi.org/10.52791/aksarayiibd.938192
• Kuipers, G. S., van Loenhout, Z., van der Ark, L. A., ve Bekker, M. H. J. (2016). Attachment insecurity, mentalization and their relation to symptoms in eating disorder patients. Attachment ve Human Development, 18(3), 250–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2015.1136660
• Luyten, P., Mayes, L. C., Nijssens, L., ve Fonagy, P. (2017). The parental reflective functioning questionnaire: Development and preliminary validation. PLoS ONE, 12(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0176218
• Luyten, P., ve Fonagy, P. (2015). The neurobiology of mentalizing. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 6(4), 366–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000117
• Maples, J. L., Carter, N. T., Few, L. R., Crego, C., Gore, W. L., Samuel, D. B., Williamson, R. L., Lynam, D. R., Widiger, T. A., Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F., ve Miller, J. D. (2015). Testing whether the DSM-5 personality disorder trait model can be measured with a reduced set of items: An item response theory investigation of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Assessment, 27(4), 1195–1210. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000120
• McDonald, R. (1985). Factor analysis and related methods. Erlbaum. Moshagen, M., Zettler, I., ve Hilbig, B. E. (2020). Measuring the dark core of personality. Psychological Assessment, 32(2), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000778
• Müller, S., Wendt, L. P., Spitzer, C., Masuhr, O., Back, S. N., ve Zimmermann, J. (2022). A critical evaluation of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ). Journal of Personality Assessment, 104(5), 613–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2021.1981346
• Müller, S., Wendt, L. P., ve Zimmermann, J. (2023). Development and validation of the certainty about mental states questionnaire (CAMSQ): A Self-report neasure of nentalizing oneself and others. Assessment, 30(3), 651–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911211061280
• Nunnally, J. C., ve Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill.
• Poznyak, E., Morosan, L., Perroud, N., Speranza, M., Badoud, D., & Debbané, M. (2019). Roles of age, gender and psychological difficulties in adolescent mentalizing. Journal of Adolescence, 74, 120-129.
• Richter, F., Steinmair, D., ve Löffler-Stastka, H. (2021). Construct validity of the mentalization scale (MentS) within a mixed psychiatric sample. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(608214). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.608214
• Schmitt, M., Baumert, A., Gollwitzer, M., ve Maes, J. (2010). The Justice Sensitivity Inventory: Factorial validity, location in the personality facet space, demographic pattern, and normative data. Social Justice Research, 23(2–3), 211–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-010-0115-2
• Sharp, C., Steinberg, L., McLaren, V., Weir, S., Ha, C., ve Fonagy, P. (2022). Refinement of the reflective function questionnaire for youth (RFQY) scale B using item response theory. Assessment, 29(6), 1204-1215.
• Spitzer, C., Müller, S., Kerber, A., Hutsebaut, J., Brähler, E., ve Zimmermann, J. (2021). Die deutsche Version der Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF): Faktorenstruktur, konvergente Validität und Normwerte in der Allgemeinbevölkerung. PPmP - Psychotherapie · Psychosomatik · Medizinische Psychologie, 71(07), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1343-2396
• Törenli-Kaya, Z., Alpay, E. H., Türkkal, Ş., ve Özçürümez, G. (2021). Validity and reliability of the turkish version of the mentalization scale (MentS). Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 34(2), 118–124. https://doi.org/10.5080/u25692
• Vachon, D. D., ve Lynam, D. R. (2016). Fixing the problem with empathy: Development and validation of the affective and cognitive measure of empathy. Assessment, 23(2), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191114567941
• Wagner, B., Brand, J., Schulz, W., ve Knaevelsrud, C. (2012). Online working alliance predicts treatment outcome for posttraumatic stress symptoms in arab war-traumatized patients. Depression and Anxiety, 29(7), 646–651. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.21962
• Wagner-Skacel, J., Riedl, D., Kampling, H., ve Lampe, A. (2022). Mentalization and dissociation after adverse childhood experiences. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 6809. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10787-8
• Weekers, L. C., Hutsebaut, J., ve Kamphuis, J. H. (2019). The level of personality functioning Scale‐Brief form 2.0: Update of a brief instrument for assessing level of personality functioning. Personality and Mental Health, 13(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.1434
• Woźniak-Prus, M., Gambin, M., Cudo, A., ve Sharp, C. (2022). IInvestigation of the factor structure of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ-8): One or two dimensions? Journal of Personality Assessment, 104(6), 736–746. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2021.2014505
• Yukay Yüksel, M., Okur, S., Akbulut, Z., ve Kütük, H. (2020). Psychometric parameters of the Turkish Version of the affective and cognitive measure of empathy (ACME). International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 11(3), 1–15.
• Yurdugül, H. (2006). Paralel, eşdeğer ve konjenerik ölçmelerde güvenirlik katsayılarının karşılaştırılması. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(1), 15–37.