Two cross-sectional samples of adults were administered the 20-item Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D). Confirmatory item factor analysis showed that RadlofFs (1977) four factor model fit the data well, but that the four factors were highly intercorrelated. A simultaneous second-order factor model fitting a single second-order Depression factor also fit well. Multiple group analyses of the first-order solution yielded invariant unstandardized item factor loadings across samples and age groups. A Cohort (Age) X Sex ANOVA on the total and subscale scores revealed lower total CES-D and subscale (Weil-Being and Depressive Affect) scores for older persons. The Somatic subscale showed no significant age differences. The results support the measurement validity of the CES-D for depression screening in older adult populations.Although it is widely recognized that depression is the most common mental health problem in the elderly, there is some confusion regarding whether there is also an age-related increase in the prevalence of depression. Recent studies have not supported the hypothesis of an age-related increase in either clinically diagnosed depression (Blazer, Hughes, & George, 1987) or depressive symptoms in adulthood (e.g., Radloff & Ten, 1986).A major issue involves the measurement properties of instruments assessing depression (Gallagher, Thompson, & Levy, 1980;Zarit, Eiler, & Hassinger, 1985). For example, several studies suggest that self-report measures of depression that include items measuring somatic manifestations of depression (e.g., fatigue, poor sleep, listlessness) may be artifactually elevated in the elderly because of somatic effects of physical illness, side effects of medications, and the like (Berry,

This study used Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to assess the differential longitudinal stabilities of state and trait anxiety. In 1985 and 1987, 227 adult volunteers (ages 22-78) rated themselves on established state and trait questionnaires. In addition, aggregated-state anxiety was measured by self-rated frequency of state anxiety experienced over the previous month. Analysis of split-half subscales from single Trait and State Anxiety scales showed the State Anxiety true score factor to have a significantly lower unstandardized autoregression coefficient (.57 vs. .91), indicating less longitudinal stability. Additional models found longitudinal factor correlations .90, .72, and .66 for Trait, Aggregate-State, and State Anxiety, respectively, further establishing the differential stability of each. There were no significant age differences in longitudinal stability or in within-occasion state-trait factor correlations.

A cross-sectional sample of adults, ages 20-79, were administered an adjective rating scale instrument measuring multiple affective states, including items from the Profile of Mood States (POMS) instrument. Confirmatory item factor analysis supported, for the most part, a priori assignments of items to scales based upon prior research, but revealed a few small, additional item factors that were cross-validated in a second sample. Items measuring different aspects of psychological distress, including anxiety and depressive affect, showed appreciable skew and kurtosis, with a substantial proportion of respondents indicating no perceived distress. Items measuring psychological well-being tended to show more normal response distributions. Tests of age-related invariance in item factor structure indicated that the unstandardized factor pattern weights (loadings) were not fully equivalent across two age groups, but showed that the same configuration of items loading on factors was supported. The scales perform well enough to justify continued use in older populations, but further research on the contributions of item distributions to age differences in factor loadings is needed.

No abstract

No abstract