Validation of the Cognitive Fusion Scale in Cuban adults with anxiety symptoms
Abstract
Background: Cognitive Fusion (CF) is a psychological problem that is a fundamental concept within Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. The Cognitive Fusion Scale (CFS), which is used to measure this concept, has not been adapted or validated in Cuba. Objective: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the CFA in adults with anxiety symptoms. Method: Qualitative and quantitative techniques were combined: Expert interview, correlation and concordance coefficients and factor analysis. Result: The CFQ was adapted from a linguistic and cultural perspective. Nine experts were consulted and consensus was assessed using the content validity coefficient of appropriateness (0.97). During piloting with 35 people, the test achieved a Cronbach's α coefficient (0.927). When the adapted test was applied to 106 adults with anxiety symptoms, a Cronbach's α coefficient (0.869) was achieved, demonstrating the homogeneity of the test. The exploratory factor analysis (KMO = 0.820, X2 (338) = 21, p < 0.001) showed item ambiguities of less than 0.6 and factor loadings of more than 0.3. The confirmatory factor analysis showed a good model fit (X2 (14) = 45.1, p < 0.001). A low and statistically significant correlation (Rho = 0.216, p < 0.05) was found in relation to IDARE (state). Conclusion: The adapted CFQ was valid in terms of content, showed high reliability values and its one-dimensionality was verified. The adapted instrument shows a correlation between FC and anxiety symptoms. An instrument like this could improve the diagnosis of CF, as well as increase the quality of care for the patient.
Downloads
References
Arés Muzio, P. (2018). Individual, family, society: the challenge of being happy. La Habana: Editorial Caminos.
Babbie, E. R. (2020). The practice of social research (15th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage.
Bauman, Z. (2015). Modernidad líquida. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Byrne, B. M. (2020). Bootstrapping as an aid to nonnormal data. In Byrne, B. M. Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS, England: Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203805534-23
Casellas Pujol, E. (2018). Integrando las terapias de tercera generación y las nuevas tecnologías en salud mental: mHealth y Terapia de Aceptación y Compromiso (ACT). Asociación Nacional de Psicólogos Clínicos y Residentes.
Elosua, P., & Egaña, M. (2020). Psicometría aplicada: Guía para el análisis de datos y escalas con jamovi. Bilbao: University of the Basque Country. https://web-argitalpena.adm.ehu.es/pdf/USPDF201508.pdf
Escobar-Pérez, J., & Cuervo-Martínez, Á. (2008). Validez de contenido y juicio de expertos: una aproximación a su utilización. Avances En Medición, 6(1), 27-36. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2981181..
Ferro-García, R., & Valero-Aguayo, L. (2017). Hipótesis transdiagnóstica desde la Psicoterapia Analítica Funcional: La formación del Yo y sus problemas. Revista Brasileira de Terapia Comportamental e Cognitiva, 19(3), 145-165. https://doi.org/10.31505/rbtcc.v19i3.1060
Freiberg Hoffmann, A., Stover, J. B., De la Iglesia, G., & Fernández Liporace, M. (2013). Polycorrelations and Tetrachoric Correlations in Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Studies. Psychological Sciences, 21(2), 151-164. https://doi.org/10.22235/cp.v7i1.1057.
Geerlings, H., Laros, J. A., Tellegen, P. J., & Glas, C. A. W. (2014). Testing the difficulty theory of the SON-R 512 -17, a non-verbal test of intelligence. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67(2), 248-265. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12017
Gillanders, D. T., Bolderston, H., Bond, F. W., Dempster, M., Flaxman, P. E., Campbell, L., Kerr, S., Tansey, L., Noel, P., Ferenbach, C., Masley, S., Roach, L., Lloyd, J., May, L., Clarke, S., & Remington, B. (2014). The Development and Initial Validation of the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire. Behavior Therapy, 45(1), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2013.09.001.
González Llaneza, M. F. (2007). Instrumentos de Evaluación Psicológica. La Habana: Editorial Ciencias Médicas. http://www.ecimed.sld.cu/2023/01/24/instrumentos-de-evaluacion-psicologica/
Han, B.-C. (2019). The society of weariness. In The society of weariness (2nd ed.). Barcelona: Herder Editorial. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvt9k12c.10
Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: Model, processes and outcomes. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006.
Hernández-Sampieri, R., & Mendoza Torres, C. P. (2018). Metodología de la investigación. Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta Las rutas Cuantitativa Cualitativa y Mixta. México: McGraw-Hill Interamericana Editores S.A.
Hernández Nieto, R. (2008). Instrumentos de recolección de datos en ciencias sociales y ciencias biomédicas. Mérida, Venezuela: Universidad de Los Andes.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2021). The liberative potential of mindfulness. Mindfulness, 12(6), 1555-1563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-021-01608-6.
Kim, B., & Cho, S. (2015). Psychometric properties of a Korean version of the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 43(10), 1715-1724. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2015.43.10.1715
Mañas, I. (2009). Mindfulness (Atención Plena): La meditación en psicología clínica. Gaceta de Psicología, 50, 13-29. https://www.academia.edu/download/40245855/Mindfunlness_Psicologia_Clinica.pdf
Muñiz, J. (2018). Introducción a la Psicometría: Teoría clásica y TRI. Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide.
Muniz, J., Elosua, P., & Hambleton, R. K. (2013). Guidelines for test translation and adaptation: Second edition. Psicothema, 25(2), 151-157. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.24.
Navarro, D., & Foxcroft, D. (2022). Learning statistics with jamovi: a tutorial for psychology students and other beginners (Version 0.75). https://doi.org/10.24384/hgc3-7p15
World Health Organization. (2022). International Classification of Diseases, 11th revision (ICD 11). https://Icd.Who.Int/Es.
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1989). El hombre y la gente. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Ramos, J. M., Rodríguez, A., Sánchez, A., Mena, A., Ramos, J. M., Rodríguez, A., Sánchez, A., & Mena, A. (2018). Cognitive fusion in personality disorders: a contribution to research on mechanisms of change. Clinica y Salud, 29(2), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.5093/CLYSA2018A8.
Romero-Moreno, R., Losada, A., Fernández-Fernández, V., Márquez-González, M., & Gillanders, D. (2014). Cognitive fusion in dementia caregiving: Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the "Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire." Behavioral Psychology/Psicología Conductual, 22(1), 117-132. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-29993-007
Rubio Gallardo, J. C. (2015). La sociedad del cansancio de Byung-Chul Han. Prospectiva, 20, 465-471. https://doi.org/10.25100/prts.v0i20.951.
Ruiz, F. J., Suárez-Falcón, J. C., Riaño-Hernández, D., & Gillanders, D. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire in Colombia. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologia, 49(1), 80-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rlp.2016.09.006.
Şahin, M., & Aybek, E. (2019). Jamovi: An Easy to Use Statistical Software for the Social Scientists. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 6(4), 670-692. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.661803
Solé, E., Racine, M., Castarlenas, E., De La Vega, R., Tomé-Pires, C., Jensen, M., & Miró, J. (2016). The psychometric properties of the cognitive fusion questionnaire in adolescents. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 32(3), 181-186. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000244.
Stelnicki, A. M., & Nordstokke, D. W. (2015). Who Is the Successful University Student? An Analysis of Personal Resources. 45(2), 214-228. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1073616.pdf
Valencia, P., & Falcón, C. (2019). Factor structure of the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire in Lima university students. Interactions: Revista de Avances En Psicología, 5(2), e167. https://doi.org/10.24016/2019.v5n2.167
Wakefield, S., Roebuck, S., & Boyden, P. (2018). The evidence base of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in psychosis: A systematic review. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 10, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.07.001.
World Medical Association (2013). WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. World Medical Association, Inc, 1-8. http://www.wma.net/es/30publications/10policies/b3/.
Zapata Tellez, J., Reyes Ortega, M. A., Somerstein Heymann, J., Marin Nava, A., & Gillanders, D. T. (2020). ¿Eres lo que piensas? Validación del Cuestionario de Fusión Cognitiva (CFQ) en población mexicana. Apuntes de Psicología, 38(3) 159-166. https://doi.org/10.55414/ap.v38i3.819
Copyright (c) 2023 Interacciones
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors retain the copyright and give the journal the right of the first publication and that they can edit it, reproduce it, distribute it, exhibit it and communicate it in the country and abroad through printed and digital media.
The digital version of the journal is registered under a Creative Commons license (Under Creative Commons License): Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Therefore, this work can be reproduced, distributed and publicly communicated in digital format, provided that the names of the authors and Interacciones.
Therefore, it is established that authors can make other independent and additional behavioural agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (eg, include it in institutional repositories or publish it in a book) as long as it is clearly indicated that the work was published for the first time in this journal.
