Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire: Persian versions of the RTQ-31 and RTQ-10

7Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction: Repetitive thinking as a transdiagnostic factor plays an essential role in the development and maintenance of emotional disorders. Two versions of the Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire (RTQ-31 and RTQ-10) are the best-known measures used for assessing repetitive thinking in clinical and nonclinical samples. The present study was conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties and factor structure of Persian versions of them. Methods: Participants were 592 students assessed with the RTQ-31, the RTQ-10, the Ruminative Response Scale, the Perseverative Thinking Questionnaire, the Beck Depression Inventory-second edition, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale-21. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were used to determine construct validity. Results: The findings showed that the RTQ-31 and the RTQ-10 demonstrated excellent internal consistency and good test-retest reliability (α = 0.946: r = 0.844) and (α = 0.903: r = 0.776) respectively. Also, five items from the original version were omitted due to inadequate factor loadings. This study showed that the resulting 26-item version has a two-factor structure, while the short version has a one-dimensional structure. Finally, it was found that repetitive thinking has a positive and powerful relationship with other measures of rumination and with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress. Conclusion: Persian versions of the RTQ have good factor structures and psychometric properties and can be used in clinical populations and related studies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hasani, M., Ahmadi, R., & Saed, O. (2022). Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire: Persian versions of the RTQ-31 and RTQ-10. Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 44. https://doi.org/10.47626/2237-6089-2020-0058

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free