An examination of social group memberships in patients with eating disorders, carers, and healthy controls

The psychometric properties of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) were evaluated in a normal sample of N = 717 who were also administered the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). The DASS was shown to possess satisfactory psychometric properties, and the factor structure was substantiated both by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In comparison to the BDI and BAI, the DASS scales showed greater separation in factor loadings. The DASS Anxiety scale correlated 0.81 with the BAI, and the DASS Depression scale correlated 0.74 with the BDI. Factor analyses suggested that the BDI differs from the DASS Depression scale primarily in that the BDI includes items such as weight loss, insomnia, somatic preoccupation and irritability, which fail to discriminate between depression and other affective states. The factor structure of the combined BDI and BAI items was virtually identical to that reported by Beck for a sample of diagnosed depressed and anxious patients, supporting the view that these clinical states are more severe expressions of the same states that may be discerned in normals. Implications of the results for the conceptualisation of depression, anxiety and tension/stress are considered, and the utility of the DASS scales in discriminating between these constructs is discussed.

A detailed comparison was made of two methods for assessing the features of eating disorders. An investigator-based interview was compared with a self-report questionnaire based directly on that interview. A number of important discrepancies emerged. Although the two measures performed similarly with respect to the assessment of unambiguous behavioral features such as self-induced vomiting and dieting, the self-report questionnaire generated higher scores than the interview when assessing more complex features such as binge eating and concerns about shape. Both methods underestimated body weight.

Recent research shows individuals' identification with in-groups to be psychologically important and socially consequential. However, there is little agreement about how identification should be conceptualized or measured. On the basis of previous work, the authors identified 5 specific components of in-group identification and offered a hierarchical 2-dimensional model within which these components are organized. Studies 1 and 2 used confirmatory factor analysis to validate the proposed model of self-definition (individual self-stereotyping, in-group homogeneity) and self-investment (solidarity, satisfaction, and centrality) dimensions, across 3 different group identities. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated the construct validity of the 5 components by examining their (concurrent) correlations with established measures of in-group identification. Studies 5-7 demonstrated the predictive and discriminant validity of the 5 components by examining their (prospective) prediction of individuals' orientation to, and emotions about, real intergroup relations. Together, these studies illustrate the conceptual and empirical value of a hierarchical multicomponent model of in-group identification.