Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T08:24:50.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Une voie de recherche en psychopathologie quantitative: présentation des travaux de P. Bech

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2020

O. Chambon
Affiliation:
67, boulevard Eugène-Réguillon, 69100Villeurbanne, France
P. Cialdella
Affiliation:
67, boulevard Eugène-Réguillon, 69100Villeurbanne, France
M. Marie-Cardine
Affiliation:
67, boulevard Eugène-Réguillon, 69100Villeurbanne, France
J.L. Terra
Affiliation:
67, boulevard Eugène-Réguillon, 69100Villeurbanne, France
Get access

Résumé

Les travaux de P. Bech sont principalement axés vers l’amélioration des qualités psychométriques des échelles d’évaluation psychiatrique déjá existantes. Dans ce but, P. Bech propose plusieurs techniques:

  • – la plus importante, résidant dans l’utilisation du modéle logistique de Rasch: le modéle de Rasch permet de s’assurer, á l’encontre de l’analyse factorielle, de la valeur d’une somme de notes d’item en vue de la mesure d’une dimension. La position (paramétre) des item sur la dimension est estimée indépendamment de la population, et les estimations sont donc théoriquement absolues. Par conséquent, si le modéle est bien adapté, les paramétres d’un item doivent rester stables, quelles que soient les caratéristiques de l’échantillon (sexe, age, diagnostic par exemple). De surcroît, le test d’ajustement du modéle de Rasch permet une vérification de l’unidimensionnalité de l’échelle;

  • – l’introduction, pour tous les degrés d’un item, d’une définition opérationnelle précise;

  • – et enfin, la recommandation de regrouper les scores globaux d’une échelle en un nombre restreint de catégories.

Bech propose également que plusieurs échelles ainsi remaniées soient réunies au sein d’un inventaire de psychopathologie générale qui posséderait plusieurs avantages, dont celui de dimensions mieux individualisées, sur les inventaires classiques.

Summary

Summary

Bech's work is principally focused on the improvement of the psychometric qualities of the already existing psychiatric rating scales. In this aim, Bech has proposed some techniques.

The most important resides in the use of Rasch's logistic model: this model allows to check, contrary to factor analysis, that a simple sum of item scores is a good measure of a dimension. The item location (parameter) on the dimension is estimated independently of the population, and the estimations are thus theoretically absolute. Consequently, if the model fits the data, the item parameters must remain stable, whatever the characteristics of the sample (sex, age, diagnosis for instance). Additionally the goodness of fit of the test with Rasch's model permits checking the unidimensionality of the scale;

— the introduction, for all degrees of each item, of precise operational definitions;

— finally, the recommendation to group together the overall scores of a scale into a more restricted number of categories.

Bech equally proposed that several scales so improved be put together within a general psychopathology inventory, which would possess numerous advantages compared to classical inventories, such as more distinct dimensions.

Type
Article original
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Références

Baker, F.B. (1987) Methodology review : item parameter estimation under the one, two and three parameter logistic models. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 11, 2, 111141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bech, P.Gram, L.F.Dein, E.Jacobsen, O.Witger, J. & Bolwig, T.G. (1975) Quantitative rating of depressive States. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 51, 161170CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bech, P.Holwing, T.G.Kramp, P. & Rafaelsen, O. J. (1979) The Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Scale and the Hamilton Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 59, 420430CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bech, P. & Rafaelsen, O. J. (1980) The use of rating scales exemplified by a comparison of the Hamilton and the Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 62 (suppl. 285), 128131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bech, P. (1981) Rating scales for affective disorders: their validity and consistency. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. suppl. 295Google ScholarPubMed
Bech, P.Allerup, P.Reisby, N. & Gram, L. (1984) Assessment of symptom change from improvement curves on the Hamilton Depression Scale in trials with antidepressants. Psychopharmacology 84, 276281CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bech, P.Kastrup, M. & Rafaelsen, O.J. (1986) Minicompendium of rating scales for States of anxiety, depression, mania, schizophrenia with corresponding DSM III syndroms. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 73 (suppl. 326) 137Google Scholar
Bech, P. (1988) Dimensions de la dépression : modèles statistiques pour l’évaluation des troubles affectifs. Psychiat. Psychobiol. 3, 37s44sGoogle Scholar
Chambon, O.Poncet, F.Kiss, L.Milani, D. & Cotraux, J. (1988) Adaptation française, validation concurrente et analyse factorielle de l’échelle de mélancolie de Bech et Rafaelsen. Encéphale 14, 443448Google Scholar
Cronbach, L.J. (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16, 3, 297334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derogatis, L.R.Lipman, R.S.Rickels, K.Uhlenhuth, E.H. & Covi, L. (1974) The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL): a measure of primary symptom dimensions. In: Psychological Measurements in Psychopharmacology (P., Pichot ed.) Mod. Probl. Pharmacopsychiatry Vol. 7, Karger, Basel, pp. 79110Google Scholar
DSM III (1980) Manuel diagnostique et statistique des troubles mentaux de l’American Psychiatrie Association. Trad. franç. sous la direction de Guelfi, J.D.Boyer, P.Henry, J.F.Lisoprawski, A.Pull, C.B.Pull, M.C. & Welshl, G. (Coord. Internat. Pichot J.), Masson, Paris, 1983Google Scholar
Hamilton, M. (1959) The assessment of anxiety States by rating. Br. J. Med. Psychol. 32, 5055CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, M. (1960) A rating scale for depression. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 23, 5662CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, M. (1974) Generals problems of psychiatric rating scales.In: Psychological Measurements in Psychopharmacology. (Pichot, P., ed.) Karger, Basel, pp. 125138Google Scholar
Hamilton, M. (1982) The effect of treatment of the melancholias (depressions). Br. J. Psychiatry 140, 223230CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hattie, J. (1985) Methodology review : assessing unidimensionality of test and items. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 9, 2, 139164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kastrup, M.Bech, P. & Rafaelsen, O. J. (1986) Rating scales for states of anxiety depression, mania and schizophrenia. A multiaxial approach. Acta Psychiatr. Belg. 86, 575581Google ScholarPubMed
Likert, R. (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch. Psychol. 140, 155Google Scholar
Montgomery, S.A.Asberg, M. (1979) A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br. J. Psychiatry 134, 382389CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nunnaly, J.C. (1978) Psychometric Theory. Mc Graw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
Overall, J.E.Gorham, D.R. (1962) The brief psychiatric rating scale. Psychol. Rep., 10, 799812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pichot, P. (1972) The problem of quantifying the symptomatology of depression.In: Depressive Illness (Kielholz, P., ed.) Hans Huber, Bern, pp. 74-81Google Scholar
Rasch, G. (1960) Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.Danish Institute for Educational Research, Copenhagen (Printed by University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980)Google Scholar
Scharfetter, C. (1971) Das AMDP System. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Frenckell, R. (1979) Première application de la méthode de reparamétrisation «prinqual” en psychopathologie quantitative.These Sciences Biomédicales Expérimentales, Université de LiégeGoogle Scholar
Wing, J.K.Cooper, J.E. & Sartorius, N. (1974) The measurement and Classification of Psychiatric Symptoms. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Wright, B.D. & Stone, M.H. (1979) Best Test Design. Mesa Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
Zeally, A.K. & Aitken, R.C.B. (1969) Measurement of mood. Proc. Soc. Med. 62, 993996Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.