Psicothema was founded in Asturias (northern Spain) in 1989, and is published jointly by the Psychology Faculty of the University of Oviedo and the Psychological Association of the Principality of Asturias (Colegio Oficial de Psicología del Principado de Asturias).
We currently publish four issues per year, which accounts for some 100 articles annually. We admit work from both the basic and applied research fields, and from all areas of Psychology, all manuscripts being anonymously reviewed prior to publication.
Rubén López-Nicolás1, María Rubio-Aparicio2, Carmen López-Ibáñez1, and Julio Sánchez-Meca1
Background: The Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS) is a well-established tool for assessing obsessive-compulsive symptomatology. A reliability generalization meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the average reliability of DOCS scores and how reliability estimates vary according to the composition and variability of samples, to identify study characteristics that can explain its variability, and to estimate the reliability induction rate. Method: A literature search produced 86 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Results: For the DOCS total scores, an average alpha coefficient of .925 was found (95% CI [.920,.931]), as well as mean alphas of .881, .905, .913, and .914 for Contamination, Responsibility, Unacceptable Thoughts, and Symmetry subscales, respectively. Moderator analysis showed that internal consistency fell significantly the more clinical and subclinical participants there were in the sample, and the larger the mean score in the sample for the total scores. The most important moderator variables for the subscales were the standard deviation and the mean of the scores. Conclusions: The DOCS scores exhibited excellent internal consistency reliability for both total score and subscale scores and DOCS is suitable both for research and clinical purposes.
Meta-análisis de Generalización de la Fiabilidad de la Dimensional Obssesive-Compulsive Scale. Antecedentes: la Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS) (Abramowitz, 2010) es un instrumento para la evaluación del TOC. En este estudio se llevó a cabo un estudio de generalización de la fiabilidad de la DOCS para estimar un coeficiente alfa medio y analizar la heterogeneidad de estos y el influjo de distintas variables moderadores. Método: se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica de 86 estudios incluibles. Resultados: para la escala total, se estimó un coeficiente alfa medio de .925, así como para sus subescalas: Contaminación .881, Responsabilidad con respecto al daño .905, Pensamientos inaceptables .913 y Simetría .913. Los análisis de moderadores revelaron que la consistencia interna disminuyó significativamente a mayor porcentaje de participantes clínicos o subclínicos en la muestra, así como a mayor puntuación media de la muestra para las puntuaciones totales; para las subescalas la desviación típica y la media de las puntuaciones fueron los moderadores más relevantes. Conclusiones: las puntuaciones de la DOCS muestran una excelente fiabilidad por consistencia interna, tanto para la escala global como para las subescalas, pudiendo usarse tanto para fines clínicos como de investigación.
SPANISH
ENGLISH
https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2020.455