There is considerable debate about the underlying factor structure of the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS) in the literature. An established view is that it reflects a unitary or bi-dimensional construct in non-clinical samples. There are, however, reasons to reconsider this conceptualisation. Based on previous factor analytic findings from both clinical and non-clinical studies, the aim of the present study was to compare 16 competing models of the BHS in a large university student sample (N = 1, 733). Sixteen distinct factor models were specified and tested using conventional confirmatory factor analytic techniques, along with confirmatory bifactor modelling. A 3-factor solution with 2 method effects (i.e., a multitrait–multimethod model) provided the best fit to the data. The reliability of this conceptualisation was supported by McDonald's coefficient omega, and the differential relationships exhibited between the three hopelessness factors (‘Feelings about the Future’, ‘Loss of Motivation’, and ‘Future Expectations’) and measures of goal disengagement, brooding rumination, suicide ideation, and suicide attempt history. The results provide statistical support for a three-trait and two-method factor model, and hence the three dimensions of hopelessness theorised by Beck. The theoretical and methodological implications of these findings are discussed.
展开▼
