Measurement Invariance of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale in India and the United States
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measurement invariance testing is considered essential in determining whether a measure can be meaningfully used across cultural groups, though establishing such invariance is relatively rare in cross-national studies. The present study investigated measurement invariance of a widely used measure of emotion dysregulation, the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004), in a sample of college students in India (n = 198) and the United States (US; n = 295). Results demonstrated that the item-level six-factor model for the DERS did not fit the data well in either the US or Indian samples. A scale score six-factor model without the item-level information fit the data well in both samples, and a scale score five-factor model (without the Lack of Emotional Clarity subscale) fit the data better in both samples. Using the five-factor scale score models, configural invariance testing indicated that the model varies across the two cultural groups. Overall, our findings failed to demonstrate measurement invariance of the DERS, suggesting that the DERS functions differently in the two cultural groups. Further research is needed to examine cross-national differences in the conceptualization and measurement of emotion regulation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it