Dissociation Beliefs Scale (DBS)

Abstract

The Dissociation Beliefs Scale (DBS), developed by Vancappel et al. (2023), is a 16-item self-report questionnaire designed to quantify an individual’s positive and negative cognitive appraisals regarding their experiences of dissociation. The development of the scale was grounded in previous qualitative research (Vancappel et al., 2022b), using verbatim statements directly reported by patients about their beliefs concerning dissociation. The final version was rigorously validated among a sample of French patients diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Psychometric evaluation confirmed that the scale possesses strong reliability and validity. Factor analysis ultimately supported a hierarchical three-factor structure, comprising one overarching general factor of Dissociation Beliefs, and two specific, distinct factors representing Positive Beliefs and Negative Beliefs about dissociation.

Keywords

Positive Beliefs, Negative Beliefs, Dissociation Beliefs, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Psychometrics, Self-Report, Trauma.

Authors

Vancappel, A., Kerbage, H., Réveillère, C., El Hage, W.

[quads id=5]

Purpose

The primary intention of the DBS is to systematically assess the cognitive appraisals, both favorable and unfavorable, that individuals hold concerning their experiences of dissociation. This assessment tool is crucial for understanding the cognitive mechanisms underlying dissociative symptoms in clinical populations.

Specifically, the scale provides distinct scores for the two core dimensions of beliefs, allowing clinicians and researchers to identify whether a patient views dissociation primarily as a helpful coping mechanism (Positive Beliefs) or as a dangerous, uncontrollable symptom (Negative Beliefs). The scale is currently validated for use within French-speaking clinical populations.

Construct

The DBS measures the psychological construct of Dissociation Beliefs, which are defined as metacognitive statements or self-referential thoughts about the function, meaning, or consequences of dissociative episodes. This construct is key to cognitive models of trauma and dissociation, suggesting that how a person interprets their symptoms significantly impacts their distress and recovery.

The construct is structured hierarchically, capturing the following specific dimensions:

• General Factor: Overall tendency toward holding beliefs about dissociation.
• Positive Beliefs: Reflecting the view that dissociation is adaptive, helpful, or protective (e.g., allowing escape from painful memories or experiences).
• Negative Beliefs: Reflecting the view that dissociation is detrimental, indicative of severe pathology, uncontrollable, or dangerous.

Validity

The validity of the DBS was primarily established through Concurrent Validity analyses, demonstrating significant associations between DBS scores and related psychological constructs, including emotion regulation difficulties and general psychopathology (depression, anxiety, and PTSD).

• Significant associations were observed between dissociation scores and beliefs about emotion (r strength ranging from 0.26 to 0.75).
• Associations between dissociation scores and the DBS scores were moderate (r strength ranging from 0.25 to 0.29).
• Negative beliefs about dissociation showed significant correlation with difficulties in emotion regulation (r strength ranging from 0.24 to 0.45).
• Furthermore, a positive association was found between various beliefs about emotion and scores for depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptomatology (r strength ranging from 0.07 to 0.28).

Reliability

The reliability of the DBS was assessed using internal consistency metrics, which confirmed high reliability across both specific factors of the scale.

The internal consistency for the primary factors, calculated using both coefficient alpha (α) and coefficient omega (ω), demonstrated that the item sets coherently measure their respective underlying constructs:

• Internal Consistency (Positive Beliefs Factor): α = ω = 0.84
• Internal Consistency (Negative Beliefs Factor): α = ω = 0.80

Factor Analysis

The development of the final DBS structure involved both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to determine the optimal dimensionality of the beliefs construct.

Initial EFA suggested a two-factor model, retaining only 8 items with the highest factor loading, which differentiated positive and negative beliefs. The eigenvalues for this two-factor solution were Factor 1 = 4.32 (explaining 27% of the variance) and Factor 2 = 3.4 (explaining 21.24% of the variance).

However, subsequent CFA indicated that the two-factor model provided an insufficient fit to the data (χ²=452; d.f.=104; p<.01; CFI=.85; RMSEA= .08). Consequently, the researchers tested a hierarchical three-factor structure (one general factor and two specific factors). This three-factor model demonstrated a significantly better and acceptable fit (χ²=241; d.f.=87; p<.01; TFI=.91; CFI=.93; RMSEA=.06), establishing it as the validated structure for the 16-item scale.

Instrument

Test Type: Original

Format: Participants rate each of the 16 items on a 5-point Likert Scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The administration method is paper-based.

Language Available: French

Population Group: Human; Male; Female

Age Group: Adulthood (18 yrs & older), including Young Adulthood (18-29 yrs), Thirties (30-39 yrs), Middle Age (40-64 yrs), and Aged (65 yrs & older).

Population Details: The validation study was conducted in France, utilizing respondents who were patients clinically diagnosed with PTSD.

Test Methodology: Test Validity, Concurrent Validity, Test Reliability, Internal Consistency, Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis.

Keywords

Dissociative Symptoms, Cognitive Appraisal, PTSD Assessment, Internal Consistency, Psychometrics, Trauma, Emotion Regulation.

[quads id=5]

Authors

Vancappel, A.

Author ORCID Identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3206-2009

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected] (Vancappel, A.)

Correspondence Address: [email protected]

Affiliations:

• Vancappel, A.: CHRU de Tours, Pôle de Psychiatrie-Addictologie
• Kerbage, H.: Saint Eloi University Hospital Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Réveillère, C.: Université de Tours Département de Psychologie, EE 1901 Qualipsy, Qualité de vie et santé psychologique
• El Hage, W.: CHRU de Tours, Pôle de Psychiatrie-Addictologie

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: Contact Corresponding Author

Commercial: No

Fee: No

Test Year: 2023

Reference’s

Vancappel, A., Kerbage, H., Réveillère, C., & El Hage, W. (2023). Validation of the French version of the Emotion and Regulation Beliefs Scale (ERBS) and Dissociation Belief Scale (DBS). Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 51(4), 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465823000097

[quads id=5]

Items of the Dissociation Beliefs Scale (DBS)

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

No data is Available