Contexts of Concealment Scales (CCS)

Abstract

The Contexts of Concealment Scales (CCS), developed by Gazarian and colleagues in 2023, is a 13-item psychological measure designed to quantify the decision-making process involved in withholding subjective distress. The scale conceptualizes concealment as a complex, multifactorial, and context-sensitive process rather than a simple binary choice. Following stringent methodological recommendations, the CCS underwent initial evaluation across diverse populations, including male students, mixed-gender community participants, and international cohorts. Initial psychometric properties, including strong evidence for reliability and validity, have been reported; however, the authors emphasize the need for continued comprehensive psychometric evaluation to fully validate the instrument.

Keywords

Concealment, Emotional Distress, Problem-Context, Decision Processes, Disclosure Desire, Social Fear, Privacy Management

Authors

Douglas Gazarian, Michael E. Addis, Jonathan D. Jampel, Ethan Hoffman

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Contexts of Concealment Scales (CCS) is to provide a nuanced assessment of the various psychological processes central to both the concealment and the disclosure of emotional distress. This instrument uniquely focuses on accounting for the crucial influence of the specific problem-context when measuring these processes.

By assessing multiple contributing factors—namely Privacy Management, Disclosure Desire, and Social Fear—the CCS offers a sophisticated tool for researchers and clinicians interested in understanding why individuals choose to withhold personal information about their difficulties, bridging the gap between general concealment measures and context-specific disclosure decisions.

Construct

The CCS measures disclosure avoidance processes, which are conceptualized as the cognitive and emotional factors influencing an individual’s decision to conceal or reveal subjective distress. The instrument operationalizes this construct through three primary subscales, each representing a distinct facet of the avoidance decision:

• Privacy Management: Reflects the individual’s desire to maintain personal boundaries and control over private information.

• Disclosure Desire: Captures the intrinsic wish or perceived need to share the distressing information with others.

• Social Fear: Measures the apprehension related to negative interpersonal consequences, such as judgment, misunderstanding, or social rejection, resulting from disclosure.

Validity

The initial validation study of the CCS reported strong evidence supporting multiple forms of validity across the three subscales.

Construct Validity: The structural integrity of the CCS was supported by the results of the factor analysis, confirming that the items coherently measure the intended underlying dimensions of concealment processes.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity: The Privacy Management and Social Fear subscales demonstrated robust convergent and discriminant validity. Specifically, these scales showed expected positive correlations with other established measures of concealment, while simultaneously exhibiting negative correlations with measures designed to capture disclosure, confirming that the CCS captures distinct but related psychological phenomena.

Concurrent Validity: Strong concurrent validity was established, as scores across all CCS subscales showed significant positive associations with measures of general psychological distress and psychosocial dysfunction, indicating that the scale effectively measures processes related to current mental health outcomes.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the CCS subscales was examined using McDonald’s Omega, yielding results that indicate high reliability for the measure.

Internal Consistency: The three core scales within the CCS demonstrated excellent internal consistency:

• Privacy Management: McDonald’s Omega = .95

• Disclosure Desire: McDonald’s Omega = .91

• Social Fear: McDonald’s Omega = .90

Factor Analysis

The development of the CCS involved rigorous statistical testing to confirm its dimensional structure.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA): Parallel analysis initially suggested that a four-factor solution might best represent the data structure of the CCS items.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA): Subsequent testing utilized Confirmatory Factor Analysis to evaluate a revised, theoretically driven three-factor model (Privacy Management, Disclosure Desire, and Social Fear). This three-factor solution demonstrated a good fit with the collected data. Key fit statistics included: Chi-squared(62) = 349.49, p < .001, CFI = .959, RMSEA = .069 (90% CI [.062-.076]), and SRMR = .045.

Measurement Invariance: To ensure the scale functions consistently across different demographic groups, measurement invariance was tested. The configural invariance model showed adequate fit (Chi-squared(124) = 409.07, p < .001, CFI = .958, RMSEA = .070 (90% CI [.062-.078]), SRMR = .050). Similar results were observed for a strong invariance model, supporting the conclusion that the CCS structure is consistent across the diverse samples studied.

Instrument

Test Type: Original Inventory/Questionnaire

Format: The scale consists of 13 primary items rated on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (a lot). These items follow initial introductory questions designed to anchor the respondent to their most distressing life issue (the “problem-context”).

Language Available: English

Population Group: Human (Male and Female)

Age Group: Adulthood (18 years and older)

Population Details: The scale was validated using diverse samples, including male university students, mixed-gender community participants, and international community participants drawn from countries such as Australia, Canada, Chile, Israel, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United States.

Test Methodology: The development and validation involved comprehensive psychometric evaluations, encompassing Test Validity (Concurrent Validity, Construct Validity, Convergent Validity, Discriminant Validity), Test Reliability (Internal Consistency), and Factor Analysis (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis, and Measurement Invariance).

Keywords

Concealment, Emotional Distress, Problem-Context, Decision Processes, Disclosure Desire, Social Fear, Privacy Management, Psychometrics

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier (Douglas Gazarian): http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4186-5006

Affiliation Email addresses (Douglas Gazarian): [email protected]

Correspondence Address (Douglas Gazarian): Clark University, Department of Psychology, 950 Main St, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States, 01610, [email protected]

Affiliations:

• Douglas Gazarian: Clark University, Department of Psychology

• Michael E. Addis: Clark University, Department of Psychology

• Jonathan D. Jampel: Clark University, Department of Psychology

• Ethan Hoffman: VA Palo Alto Healthcare System

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: Contact Publisher (The scale items themselves, however, appear in the supplementary appendix of the published article).

Fee: No

Test Year: 2023

Reference’s

Gazarian, D., Addis, M. E., Jampel, J. D., & Hoffman, E. (2023). Contexts of concealment: Initial validation of three disclosure avoidance process measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 105(2), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2022.2085110

Items of the Contexts of Concealment Scales (CCS)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Instructions: Please take a few moments to identify the most distressing thing in your life. This may be something that’s happening right now, or it could be something that happened within the past year. If there is more than one thing, please pick the one that is troubling you the most right now. Please describe it briefly:

---

a. How often do you think about this issue? (Select one)
(1) Almost Never (2) less than once per month (3) A few times per month (4) A few times per week (5) Every day (6) Almost all the time

b. When you think about this issue, how much does it trouble you? (Select one)
(1) (2) (3) (4) Somewhat (5) (6) (7) A lot
Not at all

c. How well does each statement below describe your thoughts and feelings about this issue? Please rate each statement from 1 (not at all) to 7 (a lot):

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)
1. I feel very private about this.
2. I tend to keep things like this to myself.
3. I feel very guarded about this.
4. It would be hard for me to open up about this.
5. This might be too personal to share with others.
6. I would like to talk about this with someone.
7. I would like to be more open about this.
8. It would be helpful for me to talk about this.
9. It would be a relief to share this with the right person.
10. People in my life don’t want to hear about this.
11. People in my life wouldn’t understand this if I talked about it.
12. People in my life might view me differently if I talked about this.
13. Talking about this would make other people uncomfortable.