Share This Article:

Factor Structure of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in South Korea

Full-Text HTML XML Download Download as PDF (Size:983KB) PP. 301-305
DOI: 10.4236/ojmp.2014.34031    2,564 Downloads   3,355 Views  


Results of previous studies from North America reported that only 14 out of the 20 items from the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) were required to assess negative affect, somatic symptoms, and anhedonia. However, it remains unclear whether this three-factor structure of the CES-D would be valid in South Korea. The purpose of this study is to examine the validity of the three-factor structure with a Korean version of the CES-D. The participants were Korean college students (N = 215), elementary school teachers (N = 234), and parents of elementary school students (N = 230). Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine the scale’s validity. Results indicated that the three-factor structure showed acceptable fit to data (comparative fit index = 0.95; root mean square error of approximation = 0.06). The findings indicated that the three-factor structure of the CES-D was valid in South Korea.

Cite this paper

Aoki, S. , Tsuda, A. , Horiuchi, S. , Kim, E. , Naruse, M. , Tsuchiyagaito, A. and Hong, K. (2014) Factor Structure of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in South Korea. Open Journal of Medical Psychology, 3, 301-305. doi: 10.4236/ojmp.2014.34031.


[1] Cho, M.J. and Kim, K.H. (1998) Use of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale in Korea. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 186, 304-310.
[2] Cho, M.J., Nam, J.J. and Suh, G.H. (1998) Prevalence of Symptoms of Depression in a Nationwide Sample of Korean Adults. Psychiatry Research, 81, 341-352.
[3] American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnosis and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder 5. Washington DC.
[4] Carleton, R.N., Thibodeau, M.A., Teale, M.J.N., Welch, P.G., Abrams, M.P., Robinson, T. and Asmundson, G.J.G. (2013) The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale: A Review with a Theoretical and Empirical Examination of Item Content and Factor Structure. PloS One, 8, Article ID: e58067.
[5] Judd, L.L., Akiskal, H.S. and Paulus, M.P. (2003) The Role and Clinical Significance of Subsyndromal Depressive Symptoms (SSD) in Unipolar Major Depressive Disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 45, 5-18.
[6] Sharpley, C.F. and Bitsika, V. (2013) Differences in Neurobiological Pathways of Four “Clinical Content” Subtypes of Depression. Behavioural Brain Research, 256, 368-376.
[7] Schafer, A.B. (2006) Meta-Analysis of the Factor Structures of Four Depression Questionnaires: Beck, CES-D, Hamilton, and Zung. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 123-146.
[8] Horiuchi, S., Tsuda, A. and Sakano, Y. (2013) Relationships between Practicing Effective Stress Management and Depressive Symptoms. Japanese Journal of Stress Sciences, 27, 234.
[9] Chon, K.K., Choi, S.C. and Yang, B.C. (2001) Integrated Adaptation of CES-D in Korea. Korean Journal of Health Psychology, 6, 59-76.
[10] Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999) Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55.
[11] MacCallum, R.C., Browne, M.W. and Sugawara, H.M. (1996) Power Analysis and Determination of Sample Size for Covariance Structure Modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2018 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.