DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF

DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF Download

DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF Download for free using the direct download link given at the bottom of this article.

DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF Details
DASS 21 Test Italiano
PDF Name DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF
No. of Pages 12
PDF Size 0.41 MB
Language English
Source pdfsource.org
Download LinkAvailable ✔

DASS 21 Test Italiano

Dear friends, here we are going to provide DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF for all of you. The full form of DASS 21 is the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale – 21 Items. DASS-21 is a set of three self-report scales designed to measure the emotional states of depression, anxiety and stress. Each of the three DASS-21 scales contains 7 items, divided into subscales with similar content.

The depression scale assesses dysphoria, hopelessness, devaluation of life, self-deprecation, lack of interest/involvement, anhedonia and inertia. The anxiety scale assesses autonomic arousal, skeletal muscle effects, situational anxiety, and subjective experience of anxious affect. The stress scale is sensitive to levels of chronic nonspecific arousal.

It assesses difficulty relaxing, nervous arousal, and being easily upset/agitated, irritable / over-reactive and impatient. Scores for depression, anxiety and stress are calculated by summing the scores for the relevant items. The DASS-21 is based on a dimensional rather than a categorical conception of psychological disorder.

DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF

1. Introduction

  • Depression and anxiety are highly comorbid conditions characterized by both shared and distinctive features. Their frequent co-occurrence, as well as the inability of traditional self-report measures to discriminate between them, is well known [1–3]. With regard to this, the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) is a self-report questionnaire created with the initial aim of providing maximum differentiation between the core symptoms of depression and anxiety; the major development of the DASS was conducted on non-clinical samples [4,5].
  • Items and scales were identified a priori on the basis of clinical consensus and were then empirically refined using factor analysis. A third factor emerged from the analysis of the items, which resulted in inadequate discrimination between anxiety and depression. It was labelled “stress” in that it was mainly characterized by irritability, nervous tension, difficulty relaxing, and agitation.
  • Thus, the final version of the DASS consisted of 42 items comprising three scales: (a) depression, assessing a lack of incentive, low self-esteem, and dysphoria; (b) anxiety, referring to somatic and subjective symptoms of anxiety, as well as acute responses of fear; (c) stress, evaluating irritability, impatience, tension, and persistent arousal.
  • Attempts to ascertain whether the stress scale measured a distinct syndrome or a general distress factor related to both depression and anxiety (likewise the Negative Affect postulated by the tripartite model, [6]) led to mixed results [7–9].
  • With the aim of developing a short form for use in research as well as in settings characterized by time constraints, Lovibond and Lovibond selected seven representative items from the original DASS for each scale of the questionnaire; the identified items should have good factor loadings on the original measure and scores for each reduced scale should be very close to half of the respective full-scale score.
  • This short measure was named the DASS-21. In the original manual, internal consistency data on a non-clinical sample are reported for the three scales (depression: α = .81; anxiety: α = .73; stress: α = .81), whereas neither factor analyses nor psychometric properties of the short scales are described [5].

2. Method

2.1. Participants and procedure

  • Four hundred and seventeen individuals (42.9% male), who reside in 10 different middle-sized communities in
    northern and central Italy and who had responded to advertisements requesting potential volunteers for psychological studies, entered the study. All participants were Caucasian.
  • The mean age of the sample was 36.39 (SD = 13.71; range = 18–80) and the mean years of education were
    14.18 (SD = 3.45; range = 5–23). Marital status was 48.8% single, 47.4% married or cohabitating, 2.2% separated or divorced, and 1.6% widowed. The employment profile of the total sample was: 47.7% full-time employed, 27.3% student, 4.8% part-time employed, 2.6% unemployed, 3.8% retired, 2.6% full-time homemaker, and 11.2% other.
  • To obtain data about the temporal stability of the DASS-21, a sample of 142 undergraduate students, recruited at the University of Padova (78.2% female; mean age = 20.84; SD = 1.21), completed the questionnaire on two occasions two weeks apart. As for community individuals, all students were Caucasian.
  • Clinical individuals were patients whose most severe problem was either Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition-Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) [28] diagnosed depressive disorders (depressive group, DG) or any DSM-IV-diagnosed anxiety disorder except OCD and simple phobia (anxious group, AG).
  • OCD sufferers were excluded since anxiety has been demonstrated not to be the main specific component characterizing the disorder (consistently, in light of its heterogeneity, OCD is no longer categorized within the anxiety disorders category of the fifth version of the DSM [29]); on the other hand, simple phobias are very specific conditions more linked to fear than anxiety.
  • Patients with secondary comorbid Axis-I or Axis-II diagnoses were included. Non-suitable patients were those with a current or past psychotic disorder, dementia, mental retardation, or a current substance use disorder. All patients were recruited from 6 different private settings located in northern and central Italy.
  • During the routine assessment phase, patients were interviewed by one of the members of our research team (all PhD-level psychologists experienced in diagnosing psychiatric disorders) using the Structured Clinical Interviews for DSM-IV [30,31] to establish DSM-IV diagnoses. Although inter-rater reliability for the main diagnosis was not formally examined, each case was audio-recorded and carefully reviewed in supervisory meetings and all diagnoses were reached by rater consensus.

2.2. Measures – 2.2.1. Translation of the DASS-21

The standard steps that are outlined in the psychology literature guided the translation process used in this study
[32]. In the first step, three independent researchers translated the questionnaire from English to Italian and then reached an agreement on a common version. Idiomatic Italian at the sixth-grade level was used for this step.
Moreover, the researchers reviewed the common version to ensure there were no colloquialisms, slang, or esoteric
phrases that would make interpretations difficult.

The shared form was then back-translated by a bilingual individual with extensive knowledge of psychological research. The back translation proved to be nearly identical to the original one. As a final step, the DASS-21 items of the Italian version were rated by 5 experts in anxiety and depressive disorders (each of them had extensive experience [i.e. more than 10 years], in the psychological treatment of these psychopathologies).

Each expert rated the items on a 5-point scale (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely) for clarity (the extent to which the item is clearly described). The experts’ ratings indicated excellent clarity (mean across all items = 4.6; SD = .5), suggesting that further item refinement was unnecessary.

Dass 21 Test Italian PDF

3. Results – 3.1. Factor structure

In order to identify the best factor structure of the Italian DASS-21 in the community sample and follow the
recommendations by Reise et al. [45], we conducted three different CFAs that tested three respective models: A) a
unidimensional model (all 21 items loading on a single factor); B) a three-factor oblique model (the original
DASS-21 model) [4]; and C) a bifactor model in which each of the 21 items is constrained to load on a general factor
and on one out of the three (uncorrelated) domain-specific factors (model C is represented in Fig. 1; for a graphic
representation models A and B, refer to Reise et al. [45]).

Please note that we decided not to test the fit of a second-order model (three dimensions plus a common higher-order distress factor) in light of the fact that this model would have produced an identical fit as the three-factor
oblique model [47]. Table 2 reports the means, standard deviations, and correlations for all items of the DASS-21.

The unidimensional model demonstrated the worse fit (χ2 (189, n = 417) = 656.275, p b .001; NNFI = .901; CFI = .911; RMSEA = .077), whereas the three-factor oblique model showed good fit indices: (χ2 (186, n = 417) = 353.672, p b .001; NNFI = .964; CFI = .968; RMSEA = .046). Correlations between factors in the three-factor oblique model were strong: anxiety-depression r = .69, anxiety-stress r = .74, and depression-stress r = .69.

The bifactor model resulted in the best factor solution, χ2 (168, n = 417) = 271.292, p b .001; NNFI = .975; CFI = .980; RMSEA = .038. The ΔCFI between the bifactor and the three-factor oblique model was .012, thus supporting the
the hypothesis that the bifactor model is the most appropriate in reproducing the observed data.

You can download DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF by going through the following download button.

DASS 21 Test Italiano PDF Download Link