Journal of Adult Development

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 144–154 | Cite as

Psychometric Properties of an Italian Version of the Differentiation of Self Inventory-Revised (It-DSI-R)

  • Jessica Lampis
  • Alessandra Busonera
  • Stefania Cataudella
  • Marco Tommasi
  • Elizabeth A. Skowron


The Differentiation of Self (DoS) is a key concept of Bowen’s theory, indicating a process that begins in early infancy and progresses throughout childhood and adolescence, to reach a basic level in early adulthood. This study examined the psychometric properties of an Italian version of the Differentiation of Self Inventory-Revised (DSI-R) Skowron, Schmitt, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 29:209–222, 2003), a multidimensional measure assessing DoS as conceptualized by Bowen. The sample comprised 671 subjects (age 19–69 year). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses showed that the Italian DSI-R possesses good psychometric properties. Internal consistencies were adequate. Correlations with the Dyadic Adjustment Scale, the Symptom Checklist 90-Revised, and the trait form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory were consistent with the theoretical relations among the constructs. The findings confirm the use of DSI-R as a psychometrically sound measure of the differentiation of self in the Italian context. Implications for future research and clinical practice are addressed.


Differentiation in adulthood Differentiation of self inventory-revised (DSI-R) Bowen’s family system theory Fusion with others Reliability Validity 


  1. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbin, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowen, M. (1965). Family psychotherapy with schizophrenia in the hospital and in private practice. In I. Boszormenyi-Nagy & T. J. Framo (Eds.), Intensive family therapy (pp. 213–243). Hagerstown, MD: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  4. Bowen, M. (1976). Theory and practice in psychotherapy. In P. J. Guerin (Ed.), Family therapy: Theory and practice (pp. 42–90). New York: Gardner Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. New York: Aronson.Google Scholar
  6. Carter, B., & McGoldrick, M. (1988). The changing family life cycle: A framework for family therapy (2nd edn.). New Yotk: Garner Press.Google Scholar
  7. Chung, H., & Gale, J. (2009). Family functioning and self-differentiation: A cross-cultural examination. Contemporary Family Therapy, 31, 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Derogatis, L. R. (1994). SCL-90-R administration, scoring and procedures manual (3rd edn.). Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems.Google Scholar
  9. Gentili, P., Contreras, L., Cassaniti, M., & D’Arista, F. (2002). La dyadic adjustment scale. Una misura dell’adattamento di coppia. Minerva Psichiatrica, 43, 107–116.Google Scholar
  10. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gurman, A. S., & Kniskern, D. P. (Eds.). (1991). Handbook of family therapy (Vol. 2). Philadelphia, PA: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  12. Hank, K. (2007). Proximity and contacts between older parents and their children: A European comparison. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 69, 157–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Işık, E., & Bulduk, S. (2013). Psychometric properties of the differentiation of self inventory-revised in Turkish adults. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 41(1), 102–112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Jankowski, P. J., & Hooper, L. M. (2012). Differentiation of Self: A validation study of the Bowen Theory construct. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 1(3), 226–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1986). LISREL IV: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the method of maximum likelihood. Chicago: National Educational Resources.Google Scholar
  17. Kerr, M., & Bowen, M. (1988). Family evaluation. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  18. Klever, P. (2001). The nuclear family functioning scale: Initial development and preliminary validation. Families, Systems & Health, 19(4), 397–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Klever, P. (2003). Intergenerational fusion and nuclear family functioning. Contemporary Family Therapy, 25(4), 431–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Klever, P. (2009). Goal direction and effectiveness, emotional maturity, and nuclear family functioning. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 35(3), 308–324.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Knauth, D. G., & Skowron, E. A. (2004). Psychometric evaluation of the differentiation of self inventory for adolescents. Nursing research, 53, 163–171.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lam, C. M., & Chan-So, P. C. Y. (2013). Validation of the Chinese version of differentiation of self inventory (C-DSI). Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 41(1), 86–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Luciano, M., Sampogna, G., Del Vecchio, V., Giacco, D., Mulè, A., De Rosa, C., Fiorillo, A., & Maj, M. (2012). The family in Italy: Cultural changes and implications for treatment. International Review of Psychiatry, 24(2), 149–156.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Luepnitz, D. A. (1988). The family interpreted. New Yotk: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  25. McCallum, R. (1986). Specification searches in covariance structure modeling. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 107–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Miller, J. B. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  27. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th edn.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  28. Nichols, M. P., & Schwartz, R. C. (1998). Family therapy: Concepts and methods (4th edn.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  29. Pedrabissi, L., Santinello, M. (1989). Manuale dell’adattamento italiano dello STAI forma Y. Firenze: Organizzazioni Speciali (O.S.).Google Scholar
  30. Peleg, O. (2002). Bowen theory: A study of differentiation of self, social anxiety and physiological symptoms. Contemporary Family Therapy, 24(2), 355–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peleg, O. (2008). The relation between differentiation of self and marital satisfaction: What can be learned from married people over the life course? American Journal of Family Therapy,36(5), 388–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sarno, I., Preti, E., Prunas, A., Madeddu, F. (2011). SCL-90-R symptom checklist 90-R. Adattamento italiano. Firenze: Giunti OS.Google Scholar
  33. Schnarch, D., & Regas, S. (2012). The crucible differentiation scale: Assessing differentiation in human relationships. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 38, 639–652.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Skowron, E. A. (2000). The role of differentiation of self in marital adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 229–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Skowron, E. A. (2004). Differentiation of self, personal adjustment, problem solving, and ethnic group belonging among persons of color. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82, 447–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Skowron, E. A., & Friedlander, M. (1998). The Differentiation of self inventory: Development and initial validation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Skowron, E. A., Holmes, S. E., & Sabatelli, R. M. (2003). Deconstructing differentiation: Self-regulation, interdependent relating and well-being in adulthood. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal, 25, 111–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Skowron, E. A., & Platt. F. (2005). Differentiation of self and child abuse potential in young adulthood. The Family Journal, 13, 281–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Skowron, E. A., & Schmitt, T. A. (2003). Assessing interpersonal fusion: Reliability and validity of a new DSI Fusion with others subscale. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 29, 209–222.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Skowron, E. A., Stanley, K. L., & Shapiro, M. D. (2009). A longitudinal perspective on differentiation of self, interpersonal and psychological well-being in young adulthood. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal, 31, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Skowron, E. A., Wester, S. R., & Azen, R. (2004). Differentiation of self mediates college stress and adjustment. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82, 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spielberger, C., Gorsuch, R., Lushene, R., Vagg, P., & Jacobs, G. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.Google Scholar
  44. Tomassini, C., Douglas, W., & Rosina, A. (2003). Parental housing assistance and parent–child proximity in Italy. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(3), 700–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tomassini, C., Kalogirou, S., Grundy, E., Fokkema, F., Martikainen, P., van Groenou, M. B., & Karisto, A. (2004). Contacts between elderly parents and their children in four European countries: Current patterns and future prospects. European Journal of Ageing, 1, 54–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tuason, M. T., & Friedlander, M. L. (2000). Do parents’ differentiation levels predict those of their adult children? And other tests of Bowen theory in Philippine sample. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jessica Lampis
    • 1
  • Alessandra Busonera
    • 2
    • 5
  • Stefania Cataudella
    • 1
  • Marco Tommasi
    • 3
  • Elizabeth A. Skowron
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Pedagogy, Psychology and PhilosophyUniversity of CagliariCagliariItaly
  2. 2.Department of Dynamic and Clinical PsychologySapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  3. 3.Department of Psychological Sciences, Humanities and TerritoryG. D’Annunzio University of ChietiChietiItaly
  4. 4.Department of Counseling Psychology and Human ServicesUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA
  5. 5.Selargius (CA)Italy

Personalised recommendations