4.0 Article

SPANISH VALIDATION OF THE PARENT VERSION OF THE SPENCE CHILDREN'S ANXIETY SCALE (SCAS-P) IN A CLINICAL SAMPLE1

Journal

BEHAVIORAL PSYCHOLOGY-PSICOLOGIA CONDUCTUAL
Volume 29, Issue 2, Pages 365-381

Publisher

FUNDACION VECA PARA AVANCE PSICOLOGIA
DOI: 10.51668/bp.8321209n

Keywords

anxiety disorders; children; adolescents; validation; assessment

Funding

  1. Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain [2017SGR881]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study aimed to validate the Spanish version of the parent version of the SCAS-P and found that it demonstrated good internal consistency, excellent test-retest reliability, and supported convergent and divergent validity with other measures of anxiety, depression, and externalizing problems. The original factor structure of the SCAS-P, based on six correlated factors, was partially confirmed in an exclusively clinical sample.
The child version of the Spence Children's Anxiety Scale (SCAS-C) has demonstrated good psychometric properties, but research has scarcely focused on the parent version of the questionnaire (SCAS-P). We aimed to validate the Spanish version of the SCAS-P in a clinical sample (N = 137) of children and adolescents through their parents' responses. The Spanish version of the SCAS-P showed good internal consistency for the total scale and for most subscales (Cronbachs alpha between .49 y .83) and excellent test-retest reliability for all subscales (r between .71 and .91). Furthermore, convergent and divergent validity were supported by higher correlations with other measures of anxiety (r = .51), and lower correlations with measures of depression (r = .43) and externalizing problems (r = .34). For the first time in an exclusively clinical sample, the original factor structure of the SCAS-P based on six correlated factors was partially confirmed. The validation of the SCAS-P in a clinical sample provides professionals with a tool that better reflects the characteristics of their patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available