Test/C0Retest
The reported test /C0retest correlations, for the subscales, are low (mean value .48, range .45 /C0.52). However the
interval was in this study one year (Camodeca & Rieffe, 2012).
Validity
Construct/Factor Analytic
A principal components analysis with oblimin rotation produced factor loadings on facets varying between .45
and .72; DIF mean .58, VERB .71, ANA .67, NHE .66, BA .64, AEO .62. No significant cross-loadings were
reported ( Rieffe et al., 2008 ).Lahaye et al. (2011) reported comparable findings. Confirmatory factor analyses
showed adequate fit to the data ( χ2/df51.72 to 2.33, CFI 5.87 to .89, RMSEA 5.04 to .05) for the six-factor
model. Moreover, a multigroup CFA (samples from The Netherlands [ N5665], Belgium [ N5707], and Spain
[N5464]) indicated measurement invariance for the three language versions ( χ2/df51.80, CFI 5.91, RMSEA
5.02) ( Lahaye et al., 2011 ).
Rieffe et al. (2008) present correlations between subscales as found in two samples (primary school N5403,
mean age 10 year 8 month, SD .93 month and secondary school, N5303 mean age 14 year 3 month, SD 14
month). Values ranged between /C0.31 (BA/ANA) to 1.42 (VERB/NHE), mean absolute correlation .19.
Camodeca and Rieffe (2012) found in two samples comparable low to moderate correlations; mean absolute
values .18 & .22, rages /C0.36 (VER/DIF) to 1.36 (VER/NHE) & /C0.37 (ANA/AOE) to 1.48 (VER/DIF).
Criterion/Predictive
Rieffe et al. (2008) presents correlations between the Emotion Awareness Questionnaire subscales. Although
most correlations reached significance (26 out of 30 calculated), many of these were rather low. The results were
satisfactory for the subscale ‘Differentiating emotions’ (all correlations $.3, (range .52 TEIQ to /C0.34 SCL), and
Subscale ‘Bodily awareness’ which produced three correlations $.3 out of the 5 calculated, subscale ‘Verbal
sharing emotions’ produced just one and the other subscales none.
Location
Rieffe, C., Oosterveld, P., Miers, A.C., Meerum Terwogt, M. & Ly, V. (2008). Emotion awareness and internalis-
ing symptoms in children and adolescents: The Emotion Awareness Questionnaire revised. Personality and
Individual Differences, 45, 756 /C0761.
Results and Comments
Internal Consistencies vary, depending on the age groups, from marginal to very acceptable. Factor structure
is adequate. Test /C0retest data are low, but the long interval used could be a factor in these statistics. There are,
further, indications for convergent validity for two subscales. Finally, the low correlations between subscales,
indicating that they measure different domains. However, three subscales do not measure alexithymia directly.
Still, all in all, the EAQ-30 seems a promising instrument for measuring alexithymia in children, but more
research is warranted.
EAQ Sample Items
I am often confused or puzzled about what I am feeling (DIF).
I find it difficult to explain to a friend how I feel. (VERB).
When I am upset about something, I often keep it to myself (NHE).
When I am scared or nervous, I feel something in my tummy (BA).
It is important to know how my friends are feeling (AOE).
When I am angry or upset, I try to understand why (ANA).
FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
We have reviewed all scales/measures that were specifically intended to measure alexithymia. The main result
from this review is that concurrent validity is problematic with the exception for that between the TAS-20 and
BVAQ-COG, leaving no other conclusion than that the various scales measure different domains, indicating that
there are various definitions of the alexithymia construct.251 FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
III. EMOTION REGULATION