2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2009.12.024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

German Validation of the Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scales–self-report (CAARS-S) I: Factor Structure and Normative Data

Abstract: Even though the explorative factor analysis yields a solution different from the American original, the confirmative factor analysis results in such a high model-fit that use of the American version is justified with respect to international multicenter studies, for which this instrument will be highly valuable.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
64
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
7
64
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Four factors emerged from their analyses: inattention/memory problems, hyperactivity/restlessness, impulsivity/emotional lability, and problems with self-concept. Confirmatory factor analyses of the German version in healthy adults and ADHD patients supported this factor analytic solution (Christiansen et al, 2013;Christiansen et al, 2011). The four subscales were significantly influenced by age, gender, and the number of years in education.…”
Section: Caars-l: S and Caars-l: Omentioning
confidence: 63%
“…Four factors emerged from their analyses: inattention/memory problems, hyperactivity/restlessness, impulsivity/emotional lability, and problems with self-concept. Confirmatory factor analyses of the German version in healthy adults and ADHD patients supported this factor analytic solution (Christiansen et al, 2013;Christiansen et al, 2011). The four subscales were significantly influenced by age, gender, and the number of years in education.…”
Section: Caars-l: S and Caars-l: Omentioning
confidence: 63%
“…As with the long version, the ADHD Index (Cronbach's α = 0.843) is incorporated on this form. The German version of the long form (42 items) was validated by Christiansen et al [22,23,26] and has shown to have good psychometric properties. The raw scale scores were transformed into standard T scores which were derived from the German normative data [27].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This scale for which cross-international validity has been demonstrated [22] is internationally frequently used as a screening instrument of adult ADHD. In addition, the reliability of the four subscales is sufficiently robust that the scales can be used separately for purposes of clinical description and research [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of researchers have attempted to confirm these clinical observations by developing expanded assessments that include deficits in executive functioning and in emotional control along with the DSM symptoms of inattention (AD) and hyperactivity-impulsivity (HD) and carrying out exploratory factor analyses of this expanded symptom set among patients with ADHD and controls (Amador-Campos et al , 2014; Christiansen et al , 2011; Conners et al , 1999; Kessler et al , 2010; Marchant et al , 2013; Marchant et al , 2015). These studies have found a 2-factor structure in studies of the clinician-administered Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale (WRAADDS) (Marchant et al , 2013) and the self-report version of that scale (Marchant et al , 2015) compared to 3-factor (Kessler et al , 2010), 4-factor (Amador-Campos et al , 2014; Conners et al , 1999), or 6-factor (Christiansen et al , 2011) solutions in studies using other instruments.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These studies have found a 2-factor structure in studies of the clinician-administered Wender-Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Scale (WRAADDS) (Marchant et al , 2013) and the self-report version of that scale (Marchant et al , 2015) compared to 3-factor (Kessler et al , 2010), 4-factor (Amador-Campos et al , 2014; Conners et al , 1999), or 6-factor (Christiansen et al , 2011) solutions in studies using other instruments.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%