ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Validation of the factor structure of the Experiences Questionnaire using Exploratory Graph Analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of decentering and self-compassion in self-esteem regulation: how meditation and metacognition shape the use of self-esteem regulation strategies.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Measurement properties of the Child Behavior Checklist-10: an ultra-brief screening updated in longitudinal cohort.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Validating the Chinese version of the Apathy Motivation Index and network analysis of apathy subtypes in a healthy Chinese sample.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Take a step back to see your own value: on the role of metacognition in self-esteem regulation.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Assessment of psychometric performance for the Chinese version of the Brief Inventory of Perceived Stress integrating exploratory graph analysis and confirmatory factor analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Using exploratory graph analysis (EGA) in validating the structure of the Perth alexithymia questionnaire in Iranians with chronic pain.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression, Taking It Further (MBCT-D-TiF): An Assessment of an Intervention Development Study.Global advances in integrative medicine and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Decentering describes the ability to shift the focus away from one's subjective experience onto the experience itself. The Experiences Questionnaire (EQ) is a self-report measure that was developed to systematically assess changes in Decentering ability. Although several studies show the validity of the questionnaire, there are discrepancies between the factorial structure of the Decentering scale of the EQ (EQ-D) found in the initial study (one factor) and other studies (two factors). Therefore, the current study aimed to assess the dimensionality of the EQ-D using Exploratory Graph Analysis (EGA). Methods: In total, 1,100 participants were recruited online (790 female, 307 male, 3 non-binary; age 18 to 65 years). Participants completed the EQ and the Rosenberg Self-esteem scale (RSES). Results: The bootstrapped EGA results revealed a two-dimensional structure of the EQ-D (Factor 1: Distanced Perspective, DP; Factor 2: Accepting Self-perception, AS) with high structural and item stability (all items > 0.70). The two dimensions of the EQ-D showed a high internal consistency (DP: Discussion: These results support the EQ's validity, demonstrated in a larger sample with a new methodology, aligning with existing two-factor decentering models literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.