Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Utrecht Grief Rumination Scale

Suqin Tang, Maarten C. Eisma, Jie Li, Amy Chow

OnderzoeksoutputAcademicpeer review

6 Citaten (Scopus)
46 Downloads (Pure)

Samenvatting

Given the severe mental health consequences that may ensue after bereavement, it is crucial to better understand malleable cognitive factors that are associated with poorer bereavement outcomes. Grief rumination (i.e. repetitive thinking about the causes and consequences of a loss) is a malleable cognitive process that is concurrently and longitudinally associated with post-loss mental health problems. To assess grief rumination, the English and Dutch Utrecht Grief Rumination Scales (UGRS) were recently developed. The current study examined the reliability and validity of a Chinese version of the UGRS. Three hundred and ninety-three Chinese adults (56% women) bereaved on average 16.88 months ago filled out online questionnaires assessing demographic and loss-related characteristics, grief rumination (UGRS), trait rumination, trait mindfulness, and anxious, depressive, and prolonged grief symptoms. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that a second-order five-factor hierarchical model provided the best factor structure for the Chinese UGRS. UGRS scale and subscale scores demonstrated acceptable internal consistency. Grief rumination had a moderate association with trait rumination and a low negative association with trait mindfulness, providing convergent and discriminant validity evidence. Test-criterion validity evidence was also provided. UGRS scores could distinguish bereaved groups with different relationships with the deceased. Moreover, the grief rumination was associated with symptoms of anxiety, depression, and prolonged grief even after controlling for demographic and loss-related variables, trait rumination, and trait mindfulness. The Chinese UGRS appears a valid and reliable instrument to assess grief rumination in Chinese bereaved individuals.
Originele taal-2English
Pagina's (van-tot)262-272
Aantal pagina's11
TijdschriftClinical psychology & psychotherapy
Volume26
Nummer van het tijdschrift2
Vroegere onlinedatum14-dec-2018
DOI's
StatusPublished - 2019

Citeer dit