Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Structural Validation of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

  • Published:
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite the prolific use of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), there have been no prior studies using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to compare competing HDRS latent structures. The current study undertakes this task, examining CFAs on 397 older adults on the most stable latent models previously posited and a new rationally derived model by Cole and Motivala. CFAs were evaluated in their original first-order structure and in hierarchically related counterparts. All hierarchical models performed significantly better than their first-order counterparts. Moreover, the hierarchical Cole and Motivala model was significantly better on all comparative criteria than any of the other models. However, none of the tested models obtained sufficient fit with the data suggesting psychometric, scoring, or content limitations of the scale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Addington, D., Addington, J., & Atkinson, M. (1996). A psychometric comparison of the Calgary Depression scale for Schizophrenia and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Schizophrenia Research, 19,205–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (Text revision, 4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amin, Y., Daradkeh, T., Hamdi, E., & Abou-Saleh, M. (1999). The structure of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD-17): A confirmatory factor analysis. Arab Journal of Psychiatry, 10,16–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1998). Psychological testing(7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, J. L. (1999). Amos [Version 4.01]. Chicago: Small Waters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user's guide (4.01 ed.). Chicago: Small Waters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4,561–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88,588–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, A. K., Small, B. J., Forsell, Y., Winblad, B., & Backman, L. (1998). Preclinical symptoms of major depression in very old age: A prospective longitudinal study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155,1039–1043.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkman, L. F., Berkman, C. S., Kasl, S., Freeman, D. H., Leo, L., & Ostfeld, A. M., et al. (1986). Depressive symptoms in relation to physical health and functioning in the elderly. American Journal of Epidemiology, 124,372–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K., & Stine, R. A. (1992). Bootstrapping goodness-of-fit measures in structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research, 21,205–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54,106–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C., Schulberg, H. C., & Madonia, M. J. (1995). Assessing depression in primary care practice with the Beck Depres-sion Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Psychological Assessment, 7,59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, F., Bollen, K. A., Paxton, P., Curran, P. J., & Kirby, J. B. (2001). Improper solutions in structural equation models: Causes, consequences, and strategies. Sociological Methods and Research, 29,468–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. C., Dang, J., Boyd, R. A., Lee, J. Y., Kim, J. Y., & Irwin, M. (2004). Multisample multimethod validation of the Boston CES-D 10-item short form. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Cole, J. C., Grossman, I., Prilliman, C., & Hunsaker, E. (2003).Multimethod validation of the Beck Depression Inventory-II and Grossman-Cole Depression Inventory on an inpatient sample. Psychological Reports, 93,1115–1129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. C., Oliver, T. M., McLeod, J. S., & Ouchi, B. O. (2003).Cross-validating the latent structure of Accuplacer: A factor analytic approach. Research in the Schools, 10,63–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. C., Rabin, A. S., Smith, T. L., & Kaufman, A. S. (in press).Development and validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D short form. Psychological Assessment.

  • Cole, J. C., & Randall, M. K. (2003). Comparing the cognitive models of Spearman, Horn and Cattell, and Carroll. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 21,160–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daleo, D. V., Lopez, B. R., Cole, J. C., Kaufman, A. S., Kaufman, N. L., Newcomer, B. L., et al. (1999). K-ABC simultaneous processing, DAS non-verbal reasoning, and Horn's expanded fluid-crystallized theory. Psychological Reports, 84,563–574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devins, G. M., & Orme, C. M. (1986). Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. In D. J. Kayser & R. C. Sweetland (Eds.), Test critiques (Vol. 2, pp. 144–160). Kansas City, MO: Test Corporation of American.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, M. P. A., Poirier-Littre, M. F., Guelfi, J. D., Bourdel, M. C., &Loo, H. (1995). Factorial structure of the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 92,168–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floyd, F. J., &Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7 ,286–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, R. D., Clark, D. C., & Kupfer, D. J. (1993). Exactly what does the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale measure? Journal of Psychiatric Research, 27,259–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundy, C. T., Lunnen, K. M., Lambert, M. J., Ashton, J. E., & Tovey, D. R. (1994). The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: One scale or many? Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 1 ,197–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gullion, C. M., & Rush, A. J. (1998). Toward a generalizable model of symptoms in major depressive disorder. Society of Biological Psychiatry, 44,959–972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamdi, E., Amin, Y., & Abou-Saleh, M. (1997). Performance of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in depression patients in the United Arab Emirates. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 96,416-523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. (1960). A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 23,56–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. (1967). Development of a rating scale for primary depres-sive illness. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 6 ,278–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, M. F. (1998). Rating depression severity in the elderly physically ill patient: Reliability and factor structure of the Hamilton and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scales. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 13,257–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, H. H. (1970). Modern factor analysis(Rev. ed., Vol. 2). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7,238–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecifica-tion. Psychological Methods, 3,424–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6,1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, M., & Cole, J. C. (in press). Depression and psychoneu-roimmunology.In K. Vedhara & M. Irwin (Eds.), Human psychoneuroimmunology. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Kass, R. A., & Tinsley, H. E. A. (1979). Factor analysis. Journal of Leisure Research, 11,120–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, T. Z., Kranzler, J. H., & Flanagan, D. P. (2001). What does the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) measure? Joint confirmatory factor analysis of the CAS and the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities (3rd ed.). School Psychology Review, 30,89-119.

  • Keller, S. D., Ware, J. E., Bentler, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Alonso, J., Apolone, G., et al. (1998). Use of structural equation modeling to test the construct validity of the SF-36 health survey in ten countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51,1179–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohout, F. J., Berkman, L. F., Evans, D. A., & Cornoni-Huntley, J. (1993). Two shorter forms of the CES-D depression symptoms index. Journal of Aging and Health, 5,179–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, J. S. (1983). Confirmatory factor analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcos, T., & Salamero, M. (1990). Factor study of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and the Bech Melancholia Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 82,178–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAdams, L. A., Harris, M. J., Bailey, A., Fell, R., &Jeste, D. V. (1996). Validating specific psychopathology scales in older outpatients with schizophrenia. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 184 ,246–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrew, K. S. (1997). Analysis of the major batteries according to a proposed comprehensive Gf-Gc framework. In P. L. Harrison (Ed.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, P. W., & Lambert, M. J. (1983). A review of current assessment tools for monitoring changes in depression. In M. S. Lambert, E. R. Christensen, & S. S. DeJulio (Eds.), The assessment of psychotherapy outcome. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motivala, S. J., Dang, J., & Irwin, M. (2004). A history of depression is associated with decrements in functional health status in older adults. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Mowbray, R. M. (1972). The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: A factor analysis. Psychological Medicine, 2,272–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. O., & Muthén, L. K. (2003). M Plus [Version 2.14]. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevitt, J., & Hancock, G. R. (2000). Improving the root mean square error of approximation for nonnormal conditions in structural equa-tion modeling. Journal of Experimental Education, 68,251–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Brien, K. P., & Glaudin, V. (1988). Factorial structure and factor reliability of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 78,113–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohishi, M., & Kamijima, K. (2002). A comparison of characteristics of depressed patients and efficacy of sertraline and amitriptyline between Japan and the West. Journal of Affective Disorder, 70 ,165–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onega, L. L., & Abraham, I. L. (1997). Factor structure of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression in a cohort of community-dwelling elderly. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 12,760–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pancheri, P., Picardi, A., Pasquini, M., Gaetano, P., & Biondi, M. (2002). Psychopathological dimensions of depression: A factor study of the 17-item Hamilton depression rating scale in unipo-lar depression outpatients. Journal of Affective Disorders, 68,41-47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & MacCallum, R. C. (2003). Repairing Tom Swift's electric factor analysis machine. Understanding Statistics, 2,13–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pull, C. B., Pichot, P., Pull, M.-C., & von Frenckell, R. (1979). The principal dimensions of manifest depression. Neuropsychology, 5 ,207–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1,384–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raftery, A. E. (1993). Bayesian model selection in structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 163–180). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramos-Brieva, J. A., & Cordero-Villafafila, A. (1988). A new validation of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 22,21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rehm, L. P., & O'Hara, M. W. (1985). Item characteristics of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 19,31–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigdon, E. E. (1994). Demonstrating the effects of unmodeled random measurement error. Structural Equation Modeling, 1,375–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riskind, J. H., Beck, A. T., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1987). Taking the measure of anxiety and depression validity: Validity of the reconstructed Hamilton Scales. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175,474–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santor, D. A., & Coyne, J. C. (2001). Examining symptom severity as a function of symptom severity: Item performance on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Psychological Assessment, 13,127–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, T. J., Fifield, J., Reisine, S., & Tennen, H. (1995). The measurement structure of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64,507–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Gibbons, M., & First, M. D. (1994). Structured Clinical Interview of the DSM-IV. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS Inc. (2002). {tiTISPSS for Windows} [Version 11.5.0]. New York: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steer, R. A., Beck, A. T., Riskind, J. H., & Brown, G. (1987). Relation-ships between the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Psychiatric Rating Scale for depressed outpatients. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 9,327–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25,173–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. M. (1980). Statistically-based models tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Psychometric Society Meeting, Iowa City, IA.

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, J. S., & Huba, G. J. (1984). Confirmatory hierarchical analyses of measures of psychological distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46,621–635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, O. P. (1978). On various causes of improper solutions in maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 43,225–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. B. W. (1988). A structured interview guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Archives of General Psychiatry, 45,742-747.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A unified approach to multigroup structural equation modeling with nonstandard samples. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling (pp. 35–56). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, V. E., Meyer, D. A., Rosen, S. H., & Biggs, J. T. (1978). Relia-bility of video taped Hamilton Ratings. Biological Psychiatry, 13 ,119–122.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cousins Center for Psychoneuroimmunology, University of California, Los Angeles, California

    Jason C. Cole, Sarosh J. Motivala, Jeff Dang & Michael R. Irwin

  2. San Diego Veterans', Medical Research Foundation, USA

    Anne Lucko

  3. Health Sciences Center, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado

    Nancy Lang & Myron J. Levin

  4. University of California, San Diego, California

    Michael N. Oxman

  5. San Diego Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, San Diego, California

    Michael N. Oxman

Authors
  1. Jason C. Cole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarosh J. Motivala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeff Dang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anne Lucko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nancy Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Myron J. Levin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michael N. Oxman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Michael R. Irwin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cole, J.C., Motivala, S.J., Dang, J. et al. Structural Validation of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 26, 241–254 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOBA.0000045340.38371.04

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOBA.0000045340.38371.04

Search

Navigation