Validation de la version française d’un questionnaire évaluant les pensées répétitives constructives et non constructives [Validation of the French version of a questionnaire that evaluates constructive and non-constructive repetitive thoughts]

Douilliez, Céline;Heeren, Alexandre;Lefèvre, Nathalie;Watkins, Edward;Philippot, Pierre;et.al.
(2014) Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science — Vol. 46, n° 2, p. 185-192 (2014)

Files

CERTS_OK.pdf
  • Open Access
  • Adobe PDF
  • 141.28 KB
Download

Details

Authors
Show more
Abstract
This article presents the adaptation and the validation of a short self-report questionnaire assessing repetitive thinking, the Mini Cambridge-Exeter Repetitive Thought Scale (Mini-CERTS). This 16 item scale evaluates two dimensions of repetitive thinking: "concrete, experiential thinking" (CET) and "abstract, analytical thinking" (AAT) that may have constructive and unconstructive consequences. A large sample of adult volunteers (n = 247) filled in the Mini-CERTS. Subsamples also responded to depression, anxiety and general symptomatology questionnaires as well as to a concurrent measure, the Ruminative Response Scale. Confirmatory factor analysis ascertained the two-dimension structure of the questionnaire. Correlational analyses evidenced differentiated patterns of relation between CET and AAT and anxiety, depression and general symptomatology scales. AAT was correlated to the brooding scale of the RRS but there was no relation between CET and both scales of the RRS. Preliminary data suggest that the Mini-CERTS is sensitive to clinical status and treatment. © 2012 Canadian Psychological Association.
Affiliations

Citations

  • APA
  • Chicago
  • FWB

Douilliez, C., Heeren, A., Lefèvre, N., Watkins, E., Barnard, P., & Philippot, P. (2014). Validation de la version française d’un questionnaire évaluant les pensées répétitives constructives et non constructives [Validation of the French version of a questionnaire that evaluates constructive and non-constructive repetitive thoughts]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 46(2), 185-192. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033185 (Original work published 2014)