Factor Congruence and Psychometric Properties of the Italian Version of the Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS) Across Non-Clinical and Clinical Samples

  • Gabriele Melli
  • Carlo Chiorri
  • Francesco Bulli
  • Claudia Carraresi
  • Eleonora Stopani
  • Jonathan Abramowitz


The Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS) is a self-report instrument that assesses the severity of the four most empirically supported OC symptom dimensions (Contamination, Responsibility, Unacceptable Thoughts, and Symmetry). The aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the DOCS and address associations with socio-demographical variables, psychometric properties in a community (i.e., non-student) sample, and congruence of factor solutions across non-clinical and patient samples. Factor structure, internal consistency, construct, and criterion validity were investigated in three samples of participants (315 from the general population, 106 OCD patients and 31 with other anxiety disorders [OADs]). Results supported the four-factor structure of the DOCS both in clinical and non-clinical sample, and adequate levels of factor congruence across the two samples were found. DOCS scores showed good internal consistency, temporal stability and construct validity, and could adequately discriminate between non-clinical participants, OCD and OADs patients. All the other variables kept constant, associations of DOCS total score with educational level, of Contamination with gender, and of Unacceptable Thoughts with age were also found. These findings suggest that the Italian version of the DOCS retains the adequate psychometric properties of the original, and can be confidently used as an assessment tool of OC symptoms in clinical and research settings.


Obsessive compulsive disorder Dimensional obsessive-compulsive scale Assessment Factor analysis Congruence coefficients Italian 


Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that this research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. None of the authors nor their institutions at any time received payment or services from a third party for any aspect of this work. There were no financial relationships with entities that could be perceived to influence, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing, what it has been written in this work. No patents and copyrights, either pending, issued, licensed or receiving royalties relevant to this work, need to be declared. There were no other relationships or activities that readers could perceive to have influenced, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing, what it has been written in this work.

Experiment Participants

All participants volunteered to take part to the study after being presented with a detailed description of the procedure, signed a written informed consent and were treated in accordance with the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association 2002). All procedures were approved by an institutional review board.


  1. Abramowitz, J. S., Deacon, B. J., Olatunji, B. O., Wheaton, M. G., Berman, N. C., Losardo, D., Timpano, K. R., McGrath, P. B., Riemann, B. C., Adams, T., Björgvinsson, T., Storch, E. A., & Hale, L. R. (2010). Assessment of obsessive-compulsive symptom dimensions: development and evaluation of the dimensional obsessive-compulsive scale. Psychological Assessment, 22, 180–198.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
  5. Behling, O., & Law, K. S. (2000). Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: problems and solutions (sage university papers series on quantitative applications in the social Sciences, series no. 07–131). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Benjamini, Y., Krieger, A. M., & Yekutieli, D. (2006). Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika, 93, 491–507.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, T. A., Di Nardo, P. A., & Barlow, D. H. (1994). Anxiety disorders interview schedule for DSM-IV (ADIS-IV). San Antonio: Psychological Corporation/Graywind Publications Incorporated.Google Scholar
  8. Buja, A., & Eyuboglu, N. (1992). Remarks on parallel analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 509–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: basic issues in scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. de Winter, J. C. F., Dodou, D., & Wieringa, P. A. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44, 147–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deacon, B. J., & Abramowitz, J. S. (2005). The Yale-brown obsessive compulsive scale: factor analysis, construct validity, and suggestions for refinement. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 19, 573–585.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Enander, J., Andersson, E., Kaldo, V., Lindefors, N., Andersson, G., & Rück, C. (2012). Internet administration of the dimensional obsessive-compulsive scale: a psychometric evaluation. Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders, 1, 325–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000 Investigators. (2004). Prevalence of mental disorders in Europe: Results from the European study of the epidemiology of mental disorders (ESEMeD) project. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 109(Suppl. 420), 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Foa, E. B., Kozak, M. J., Salkovskis, P. M., Coles, M. E., & Amir, N. (1998). The validation of a new obsessive-compulsive disorder scale: the obsessive-compulsive inventory. Psychological Assessment, 10, 206–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Foa, E. B., Huppert, J. D., Leiberg, S., Langner, R., Kichic, R., Hajcak, G., & Salkovskis, P. M. (2002). The obsessive-compulsive inventory: development and validation of a short version. Psychological Assessment, 14, 485–496.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Goodman, W. K., Price, L. H., Rasmussen, S. A., Mazure, C., Fleischman, R. L., Hill, C. L., Heninger, G. R., & Charney, D. S. (1989a). The Yale-brown obsessive compulsive scale: i. development, use, and reliability. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 1006–1011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodman, W. L., Price, L. H., Rasmussen, S. A., & Mazure, C. (1989b). The Yale-brown obsessive compulsive scale (Y-BOCS): validity. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 1012–1016.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hénin, M. (2012). Yale-brown obsessive-compulsive scale. In C. Sica (Ed.), Disturbo ossessivo-compulsivo. questionari e interviste per la valutazione clinica. Trento: Erickson.Google Scholar
  19. Hong, G. (2012). Marginal mean weighting through stratification: a generalized method for evaluating multivalued and multiple treatments with nonexperimental data. Psychological Methods, 17, 44–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. López-Solà, C., Gutiérrez, F., Alonso, P., Rosado, S., Taberner, J., Segalàs, C., Real, E., Menchón, J. M., & Fullana, M. A. (2013). Spanish version of the dimensional obsessive–compulsive scale (docs): psychometric properties and relation to obsessive beliefs. Comprehensive Psychiatry. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2013.08.015.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2006). FACTOR: a computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavioral Research Methods, 38, 88–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lorenzo-Seva, U., & ten Berge, J. M. F. (2006). Tucker’s congruence coefficient as a meaningful index of factor similarity. Methodology, 2(2), 57–64.Google Scholar
  23. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Preacher, K. J., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis: the role of model error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 611–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2010). A new look at the big-five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471–491.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Mataix-Cols, D., Rosario-Campos, M. C., & Leckman, J. F. (2005). A multidimensional model of obsessive-compulsive disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 228–238.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1, 30–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McKay, D., Abramowitz, J. S., Calamari, J. E., Kyrios, M., Radomsky, A., Sookman, D., Taylor, S., & Wilhelm, S. (2004). A critical evaluation of obsessive-compulsive disorder subtypes: symptoms versus mechanisms. Clinical Psychology Review, 24, 283–313.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 4, 599–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Muthen, B., du Toit, S. H. C., & Spisic, D. (1997). Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equations in latent variable modelling with categorical and continuous outcomes (Technical Report). Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar
  31. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  32. Ólafsson, R. P., Arngrímsson, J. B., Árnason, P., Kolbeinsson, Þ., Emmelkamp, P. M. G., Kristjánsson, Á., & Olason, D. Þ. (2013). The Icelandic version of the dimensional obsessive compulsive Scale (DOCS) and its relationship with obsessive beliefs. Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders. doi: 10.1016/j.jocrd.2013.02.001.Google Scholar
  33. Olatunji, B. O., Sawchuck, C. N., Arrindell, W. A., & Lohr, J. M. (2005). Disgust sensitivity as a mediator of the sex differences in contamination fears. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 713–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Profet, M. (1992). Pregnancy sickness as adaptation: a deterrent to maternal ingestion of teratogens. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 327–365). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Rasmussen, S. A., & Eisen, J. L. (1992). The epidemiology and clinical features of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 15, 743–759.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Rosario-Campos, M. C., Miguel, E. C., Quatrano, S., Chacon, P., Ferrao, Y., Findley, D., Katsovich, L., Scahill, L., King, R. A., Woody, S. R., Tolin, D., Hollander, E., Kano, Y., & Leckman, J. F. (2006). The dimensional Yale–Brown obsessive-compulsive scale (DY-BOCS): an instrument for assessing obsessive–compulsive symptom dimensions. Molecular Psychiatry, 11, 495–504.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sanavio, E. (1988). Obsessions and compulsions: the Padua inventory. Behavior Research and Therapy, 26, 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schafer, J. L., & Kang, J. D. Y. (2008). Average causal effects from nonrandomized studies: a practical guide and simulated example. Psychological Methods, 13, 279–313.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Sica, C., Novara, C., & Sanavio, E. (2002). Culture and psychopathology: superstition and obsessive-compulsive cognitions and symptoms in a non-clinical Italian sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1001–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sica, C., Taylor, S., Arrindell, W. A., & Sanavio, E. (2006). A cross-cultural test of the cognitive theory of obsessions and compulsions: a comparison of Greek, Italian, and American individuals. A preliminary study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 30, 585–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sica, C., Ghisi, M., Altoè, G., Chiri, L. R., Franceschini, S., Coradeschi, D., & Melli, G. (2008). The Italian version of the obsessive compulsive inventory: its psychometric properties on community and clinical samples. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 23, 204–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Timmerman, M. E., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods, 16, 89–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tucker, L. R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies (Personnel Research Section Report No. 984). Washington: Department of the Army.Google Scholar
  45. Velicer, W. F. (1976). Determining the number of factors from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41, 321–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang, C., Wang, J., Tang, T., Zhang, S., & Bjorgvinsson, T. (2012). Psychometric validation of dimensional obsessive-compulsive scale (DOCS) in Chinese college students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20, 315–319.Google Scholar
  47. Weissman, M. M., Bland, R. C., Canino, G. J., Greenwald, S., Hwu, H. G., Lee, C. K., et al. (1994). The cross national epidemiology of obsessive compulsive disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 55, 5–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Westen, D., & Rosenthal, R. (2003). Quantifying construct validity: two simple measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 608–618.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriele Melli
    • 1
  • Carlo Chiorri
    • 2
  • Francesco Bulli
    • 1
  • Claudia Carraresi
    • 1
  • Eleonora Stopani
    • 1
  • Jonathan Abramowitz
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Behavioral and Cognitive Psychology and PsychotherapyFlorenceItaly
  2. 2.Department of Educational Sciences, Psychology UnitUniversity of GenoaGenoaItaly
  3. 3.University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillNorth Carolina

Personalised recommendations