Hebrew version of the Desire Thinking Questionnaire (Caselli & Spada, 2011) (Efrati et al., 2020)

Prevalence of repeated desire ideation in Israeli adolescents and adults. 6 Items, Ages 14-18
  • Populations: Israeli Adolescents
  • Age ranges: 14-18; 18-63
  • Languages: Hebrew, English
  • Countries: Israel

Items

Subscales:

  • Verbal Perseveration
  • Imaginal Prefiguration

Four items removed from initial instrument by developers: 5, 6, 8, 9

Please see (Efrati et al., 2020) for items in Hebrew due to technical difficulty.

  • I imagine myself doing the desired activity
  • I imagine how I would feel like when engaging in the desired activity
  • I anticipate the sensations I would feel practicing the desired activitiy
  • If I were not practice the desired activity for a long time, I would think about it continusously
  • I repeat mentally to myself that I need to practice the desired activity
  • My mind is focused on repeating what I desire till I mange to satisfy it.

Items were framed as statements to which participants could respond to on a four-point Likert-type scale to indicate their level of agreement (“1. Almost never”, “2. Sometimes”, “3. Often”, and “4. Almost Always”). 

Scoring

“The first factor concerns the perseveration of verbal thoughts about desire-related content and experience (Verbal Perseveration). The second factor concerns the tendency to prefigure images about desire-related content and experience (Imaginal Prefiguration). Higher scores on both factors and on the total measure indicate higher levels of desire thinking.” (Caselli & Spada, 2011)

Citations

Caselli, G., & Spada, M. M. (2011). The Desire Thinking Questionnaire: Development and psychometric properties. Addictive Behaviors, 36(11), 1061–1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.06.013

 

Efrati, Y., Kolubinski, D. C., Caselli, G., & Spada, M. M. (2020). Desire thinking as a predictor of compulsive sexual behaviour in adolescents: Evidence from a cross-cultural validation of the Hebrew version of the Desire Thinking Questionnaire. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 9(3), 797–807. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00062

Scoring breakdown

Measure development

  • Significant design input from young people
  • Cognitive interviews with young people
  • Expert input

Validity

  • Green: Face validity
  • Green: Convergent validity
  • Green: Construct validity

Reliability

  • Green: Internal consistency
  • Unknown: Test-retest

Ease of use

  • Unknown: Readability

Definitions

Face validity: How well a measure appears to represent the construct it is supposed to be measuring.

Convergent validity: How well a measure correlates with other hypothetically-related measures.

Construct validity: The extent to which a measure reflects the construct it was designed to evaluate.

Internal consistency: The extent to which items in a scale capture aspects of the same construct.

Test-retest: The degree to which measurement scores are consistent over a short period of time (usually 2 weeks).

Readability: The ease with which a reader can understand the questionnaire items.

Key

  • Green: Meets validation criteria
  • Red: Does not meet validation criteria
  • Unknown: Evidence not available

Categories

Start a new search

Loading