Background:

Repetitive negative thinking is conceptualized to be a transdiagnostic process linked to the development and maintenance of psychopathology. Prior research distinguishes between disorder-specific exemplars (worry, rumination) and transdiagnostic measures of repetitive negative thinking with differences across disorders reported. However, establishing the measurement invariance of these measures is necessary to support meaningful comparisons across clinical groups.

Method:

Bayesian structural equation modelling was used to assess the approximate invariance of the Ruminative Response Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, and the Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire across individuals with a principal diagnosis of either depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, or generalized anxiety disorder.

Results:

All scales demonstrated approximate measurement invariance across the three disorder groups. The depressive disorder group reported a higher level of rumination than the generalized anxiety disorder group (Δµ = 0.25, 95% Credibility Interval [0.06, 0.45]), with no difference between the generalized anxiety disorder and social anxiety disorder groups. The depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder groups did not differ in their levels of trait repetitive negative thinking, but the social anxiety disorder group was markedly lower than the generalized anxiety disorder group (Δµ = −0.21 [−0.37, −0.05]). Similarly, levels of worry did not differ between the generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorder group but were lower in the social anxiety disorder group than the generalized anxiety disorder group (Δµ = −0.23 [−0.41, −0.06]).

Conclusions:

The Ruminative Response Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, and Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire are measuring trait repetitive negative thinking in a consistent manner across individuals with a principal diagnosis of depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, or generalized anxiety disorder. This supports their use in transdiagnostic contexts and indicates that it is appropriate to directly compare the scores on these measures between diagnostic groups.

中文翻译：

---

重复性消极思维的障碍特异性和跨诊断测量的测量不变性

背景：

重复性消极思维被概念化为与精神病理学的发展和维持相关的跨诊断过程。先前的研究区分了特定于疾病的范例（担心、反刍）和重复性消极思维的跨诊断措施，报告的疾病之间存在差异。然而，建立这些测量的测量不变性对于支持跨临床组的有意义的比较是必要的。

方法：

贝叶斯结构方程模型用于评估主要诊断为抑郁症、社交焦虑症或广泛性焦虑症的个体的反刍反应量表、宾州忧虑问卷和重复思维问卷的近似不变性。

结果：

所有量表都证明了三个障碍组的近似测量不变性。抑郁症组报告的反刍水平高于广泛性焦虑症组（Δµ = 0.25, 95% 可信区间 [0.06, 0.45]），广泛性焦虑症组和社交焦虑症组之间没有差异。抑郁症组和广泛性焦虑症组的重复性消极思维水平没有差异，但社交焦虑症组明显低于广泛性焦虑症组（Δµ = -0.21 [-0.37, -0.05]）。同样，广泛性焦虑症组和抑郁症组之间的担忧程度没有差异，但社交焦虑症组低于广泛性焦虑症组（Δµ = -0.23 [-0.41, -0.06]）。

结论：

反刍反应量表、宾夕法尼亚州立大学忧虑问卷和重复性思维问卷正在以一致的方式测量主要诊断为抑郁症、社交焦虑症或广泛性焦虑症的个体的重复性消极思维特征。这支持它们在跨诊断上下文中的使用，并表明直接比较诊断组之间这些测量的分数是合适的。