Stressful events in autobiographical memory processing: Brazilian version of the centrality of event scale

Abstract

A stressful or traumatic event may become a central reference point in the organization of long-term memory, influencing the meaning of other experiences. The Centrality of Event Scale (CES) is an instrument in which participants recall the most traumatic event of their life and endorse 20 items. The CES was translated, adapted and validated for the Brazilian context in a sample of 195 undergraduates (75.8% women). The version obtained good internal consistency and significant correlation with a screening measure of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms. New hypotheses on the cognitive processing of traumatic events are explored in the light of a factor analysis of the CES. Opportunities for CES use include monitoring cognitive patterns and therapeutic effectiveness in situations related to trauma. Keywords: Centrality of event, stress, trauma, memory, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. ResumoUm evento estressor ou traumático pode tornar-se um ponto de referência central na organização da memória de longo prazo, influenciando a significação das demais experiências. A Escala de Centralidade de Evento (ECE) é um instrumento em que o sujeito recorda o evento mais traumático de sua vida e endossa 20 itens respectivos. A ECE foi traduzida, adaptada e validada mediante aplicação em 195 estudantes universitários (75,8% mulheres). Os resultados indicaram boa consistência interna e correlação significativa com rastreio de sintomas de estresse pós-traumático. Novas hipóteses explicativas do processamento cognitivo de eventos traumáticos são exploradas em resultados de uma análise fatorial exploratória. Oportunidades de aplicação da ECE incluem monitoramento de padrões cognitivos e efetividade terapêutica em situações relacionadas a trauma. Palavras-chave: Centralidade de evento, estresse, trauma, memória, Transtorno de Estresse Pós-Traumático.

The Centrality of Events Scale in Portuguese Adolescents: Validity Evidence Based on Internal Structure and on Relations to Other Variables

“…It did not achieve acceptable fit indicators (see Table 2; AIC = 29712.818). Gauer et al (2013) also suggested a short version of the CES, which proved to be an acceptable fit to the combined sample used in the current work (see Table 2; AIC = 29415.849). Lastly, a three-factor measurement model allocating each of the seven items selected by Berntsen and Rubin (2006) to their intended content was also tested via CFA.…”

“…It will be up to the researcher or clinician to choose at each time which version of the instrument best suits his/her goals. Note: CES-A = Centrality of Event for Adolescents; CFA = confirmatory factor analysis; (0) refers to the measurement models suggested by Bernstein and Rubin (2006); (1) refers to the measurement models suggested by Gauer et al, (2013); (2) Note. All loading values were significant at p < .001.…”

“…Taking into account that a one-factor solution had been previously validated for a Portuguese adolescent sample, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on this measurement model. It did not achieve an acceptable fit for the data taken from the combined sample (see Table 2, AIC = 83376.138).A CFA was next applied to the three factor model proposed by Gauer et al, (2013). It also did not achieve acceptable fit indicators (see Table 2; AIC = 82826.808).…”

Factor Structure, Internal Consistency and Criterion Validity of the Full‐form and Short‐form Versions of the Centrality of Events Scale in Young People

“…However, recent studies with non‐English speaking samples with different cultural backgrounds have shown different factor structures. For example, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the 20‐item CES (Gauer et al, ) evidenced three factors for both versions, and the Portugal Portuguese Adolescent version showed a three‐factor structure for the 20‐item version but a one‐factor structure for the 7‐item version (Vagos et al, ). In addition, the study conducted by Robinaugh and McNally () also found a three‐factor structure with the original 20‐item version (Robinaugh & McNally, ).…”

“…While the preliminary research with the CES is promising, there remains some controversy about its factor structure. For example, in an exploratory principal components analysis, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the 20‐item evidenced three components with eigenvalues greater than one in a sample of young adults (Gauer, de Souza, da Silveira, & Sediyama, ). Robinaugh and McNally () also found that the 20‐item version of the CES best represented three factors (Robinaugh & McNally, ).…”