Julie D. Henry

OBJECTIVES: To test the construct validity of the short-form version of the Depression anxiety and stress scale (DASS-21), and in particular, to assess whether stress as indexed by this measure is synonymous with negative affectivity (NA) or whether it represents a related, but distinct, construct. To provide normative data for the general adult population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, correlational and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). METHODS: The DASS-21 was administered to a non-clinical sample, broadly representative of the general adult UK population (N = 1,794). Competing models of the latent structure of the DASS-21 were evaluated using CFA. RESULTS: The model with optimal fit (RCFI = 0.94) had a quadripartite structure, and consisted of a general factor of psychological distress plus orthogonal specific factors of depression, anxiety, and stress. This model was a significantly better fit than a competing model that tested the possibility that the Stress scale simply measures NA. CONCLUSIONS: The DASS-21 subscales can validly be used to measure the dimensions of depression, anxiety, and stress. However, each of these subscales also taps a more general dimension of psychological distress or NA. The utility of the measure is enhanced by the provision of normative data based on a large sample.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reliability and validity of the PANAS (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988b) and provide normative data. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and correlational. METHOD: The PANAS was administered to a non-clinical sample, broadly representative of the general adult UK population (N = 1,003). Competing models of the latent structure of the PANAS were evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis. Regression and correlational analysis were used to determine the influence of demographic variables on PANAS scores as well as the relationship between the PANAS with measures of depression and anxiety (the HADS and the DASS). RESULTS: The best-fitting model (robust comparative fit index = .94) of the latent structure of the PANAS consisted of two correlated factors corresponding to the PA and NA scales, and permitted correlated error between items drawn from the same mood subcategories (Zevon & Tellegen, 1982). Demographic variables had only very modest influences on PANAS scores and the PANAS exhibited measurement invariance across demographic subgroups. The reliability of the PANAS was high, and the pattern of relationships between the PANAS and the DASS and HADS were consistent with tripartite theory. CONCLUSION: The PANAS is a reliable and valid measure of the constructs it was intended to assess, although the hypothesis of complete independence between PA and NA must be rejected. The utility of this measure is enhanced by the provision of large-scale normative data.

OBJECTIVES: To provide UK normative data for the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) and test its convergent, discriminant and construct validity. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, correlational and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). METHODS: The DASS was administered to a non-clinical sample, broadly representative of the general adult UK population (N = 1,771) in terms of demographic variables. Competing models of the latent structure of the DASS were derived from theoretical and empirical sources and evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis. Correlational analysis was used to determine the influence of demographic variables on DASS scores. The convergent and discriminant validity of the measure was examined through correlating the measure with two other measures of depression and anxiety (the HADS and the sAD), and a measure of positive and negative affectivity (the PANAS). RESULTS: The best fitting model (CFI =.93) of the latent structure of the DASS consisted of three correlated factors corresponding to the depression, anxiety and stress scales with correlated error permitted between items comprising the DASS subscales. Demographic variables had only very modest influences on DASS scores. The reliability of the DASS was excellent, and the measure possessed adequate convergent and discriminant validity Conclusions: The DASS is a reliable and valid measure of the constructs it was intended to assess. The utility of this measure for UK clinicians is enhanced by the provision of large sample normative data.