Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37383923›Full record

ArticlePsychology in Russia : state of the art2023

Psychometric Analysis of Two Brief Versions of the CERQ in the Argentinean Population: CERQ-18 and CERQ-27.

Sergio Dominguez-Lara, Luciana Moretti, Pablo Ezequiel Flores-Kanter, Roger Muñoz-Navarro, Leonardo A Medrano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology in Russia : state of the art, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sergio Dominguez-Larade San Martín de Porres, Lima, Perú.
Luciana MorettiPontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra, República Dominicana.
Pablo Ezequiel Flores-KanterUniversidad Siglo 21, Argentina.
Roger Muñoz-NavarroUniversitat de València, Spain.
Leonardo A MedranoPontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra, República Dominicana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Emotion Regulation (ER) involves any explicit or implicit process that may alter the emotion felt, its duration and expression, and is a transdiagnostic factor of vulnerability involved in the etiology and maintenance of different emotional disorders. The Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ) assesses nine cognitive strategies involved in ER and is a valuable tool. Its popularity and wide use led to the development of two abbreviated versions: a version with 18 items (two items per factor) and a 27-item version (three items per factor). Objective: To analyze the psychometric properties of both versions in the Argentinean population. Design: The research design was instrumental. The factor structure of the CERQ-18 and CERQ-27 as well as the reliability of the scores and the construct of each dimension were evaluated. In addition, we gathered validity evidence for its relationship with other variables by associating the CERQ scores with Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) scores. Results: The CERQ-18 presented more consistent evidence regarding its internal structure (adequate fit indices and factor loadings of moderate magnitude) and reliability. Given that the association of the two versions with the DERS is similar, we recommend that the 18-item version be used. Conclusion: The CERQ-18 has quite similar psychometric properties to the CERQ-27 in the general population of Argentina and the findings contribute to an understanding of its internal structure.

Indexed as

cognitive regulationEmotionreliabilityshort scalevalidity

Identifiers

PMID37383923
PMCPMC10294272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.