OBJECTIVE: This study is the first to analyze the factor structure of the Center for Epistemological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale with custodial grandmothers involving both cross validation and convergent validity analyses. METHOD: Cross validation was accomplished with two different samples of custodial grandmothers (GCM) to calibrate (n=733; Average Age=52) and then validate (n=343; Average Age=52.5) the model. RESULTS: Radloff's originally proposed four factor model (Depressed Affect, Well-Being, Somatic Symptoms, and Interpersonal Problems) was found to best fit the data for both calibration (RMSEA=0.049) and validation samples (RMSEA=0.050). The construct validity of the four CES-D factors was supported by the correlations observed between these factors and conceptually related psychosocial measures. CONCLUSION: four CES-D factors as proposed are psychometrically sound when applied to custodial grandmothers and that each factor contributes unique and meaningful information in its own right.
OBJECTIVE: This study is the first to analyze the factor structure of the Center for Epistemological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale with custodial grandmothers involving both cross validation and convergent validity analyses. METHOD: Cross validation was accomplished with two different samples of custodial grandmothers (GCM) to calibrate (n=733; Average Age=52) and then validate (n=343; Average Age=52.5) the model. RESULTS: Radloff's originally proposed four factor model (Depressed Affect, Well-Being, Somatic Symptoms, and Interpersonal Problems) was found to best fit the data for both calibration (RMSEA=0.049) and validation samples (RMSEA=0.050). The construct validity of the four CES-D factors was supported by the correlations observed between these factors and conceptually related psychosocial measures. CONCLUSION: four CES-D factors as proposed are psychometrically sound when applied to custodial grandmothers and that each factor contributes unique and meaningful information in its own right.