Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Turkish Translation of a Measure of Irrational and Rational Beliefs: Reliability, Validity Studies and Confirmation of the Four Cognitive Processes Model

  • Published:
Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study adapted the Attitudes and Belief Scale-2 (ABS-2) into Turkish and investigated its factor structure, criterion-related validity, and psychometric properties. The ABS-2 assesses REBT’s irrational and rational beliefs. Each item reflects one of the four cognitive processes thought identified the theory to reflect irrationality or rationality. These include demandingness versus preferences, awfulizing versus realistic negative evaluations, frustration intolerance versus tolerance, and self-condemnation versus self-acceptance. Each item reflects one of three content areas of achievement, affiliation, or comfort. Despite the ABS-2’s good validity, researchers have criticized its factor structure. This weak support questions REBT’s theoretical assumptions. This article includes four studies that describe the translation into Turkish and comparability of the two versions, the test–retest reliability, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and criterion-related validity. The four samples consisted of 811 participants. A two-factor structure (one representing rational items and another consists irrational beliefs items) was supported by confirmatory factor analysis. Criterion-related validity analysis was supported as the ABS-2 correlated positively with the Jones’ Irrational Beliefs Test, anxiety and depression dimensions of brief symptom inventory, and the need for absolute truth. The research supported the four cognitive process model.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akaike, H. (1974). Stochastic theory of minimal realization. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19(6), 667–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artiran, M. (2015). A new scale based on rational emotive behavior therapy and self-determination theory: Development of Rational Emotive Self Determination Scale (RESD). Istanbul Arel University. Doctorate Thesis. Istanbul.

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Edwards, J. R. (1998). A general approach for representing constructs in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 45–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Heatherton, T. F. (1994). A general approach to representing multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self-esteem. Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 35–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandalos, D. L. (2008). Is parceling really necessary? A comparison of results from item parceling and categorical variable methodology. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 15(2), 211–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2001). Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling (pp. 269–296). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. New York, NY: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridges, K. R., & Sanderman, R. (2002). The irrational beliefs inventory: Cross cultural comparisons between American and Dutch samples. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 20(1), 65–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2001). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS Release 10 for Windows: A guide for social scientists. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, P. (1986). Belief systems and emotional disturbance: An evaluation of the rational emotive model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

  • Burgess, P. M. (1990). Toward resolution of conceptual issues in the assessment of belief systems in rational-emotive therapy. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 4(2), 171–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Manual of data analysis for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Academy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, I. M. (1985). The psychology of homosexuality. In A. Ellis & M. E. Bernard (Eds.), Clinical applications of rational-emotive therapy (pp. 153–180). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, A., Houts, R. M., Belsky, D. W., Goldman-Mellor, S. J., Harrington, H., Israel, S., et al. (2014). The p factor: One general psychopathology factor in the structure of psychiatric disorders? Clinical Psychological Science, 2(2), 119–137.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Collard, J., & O’Kelly, M. (2011). Rational emotive behavior therapy: A positive perspective. Journal of Rational Emotive Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 29, 248–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, D., Lynn, S. J., & Ellis, A. (2010). Rational and irrational beliefs: Research, theory, and clinical practice. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derogatis, L. R. (1992). BSI: Administration, scoring, and procedures manual -II. Towson: Clinical Psychometric Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Introducing LISREL. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R. A., Doyle, K. A., Dryden, W., & Backx, W. (2014). A practitioner’s guide to rational emotive behavior therapy (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R., & Leaf, R. C. (1990). The endorsement of irrational beliefs in a general clinical population. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 8(4), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R., Leaf, R., Gorman, B., & Robin, M. W. (2018). The development of a measure of irrational/rational beliefs. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy., 36(1), 47–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R., Gorman. B., & Raptis, J. (2020). The factor structure of the Attitudes and Beliefs Scale-2 (Manuscript submitted).

  • DiGiuseppe, R., Robin, M. W., Leaf, R., & Gorman, B. (1989). A cross-validation and factor analysis of a measure of irrational beliefs (p. 29). Present at World Congress of Cognitive Therapy. Oxford, England.

  • Dolliver, R. (1977). The relationship of rational-emotive therapy to other psychotherapies and personality theories. The Counseling Psychologist, 7(1), 57–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. Secaucus: Lyle Stuart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (1994). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy (Re ed.). Secaucus, NJ: Birch Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (2003). The relationship of rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT) to social psychology. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 21(1), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A., & Dryden, W. (1997). The practice of rational-emotive therapy (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epictetus (1996). The Enchiridion. Boulder, CO: NetLibrary. This text file is based on and adapted from Elizabeth Carter’s 1758 English translation of the Enchiridion.

  • Farakhbakhsh, K. (1993). Investigating and comparing the amount of irrational beliefs in depressed patients who range from 20 – 50 years old and referred to psychiatric centers in Isfahan. MA thesis. Counseling Major, Alamah Tabatabae, I University.

  • Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fülöp, I. (2007). A confirmatory factor analysis of the attitudes and belief scale 2. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies, 7(2), 159–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, R., & Greenbaum, C. W. (1998). Facet theory: Its development and current status. European Psychologist, 3(1), 13–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 3–38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, P. (2014). A rational emotive behaviour therapy perspective on the nature and structure of posttraumatic stress responses: The mediating and moderating effects of rational and irrational beliefs. Doctorate Thesis. School of Psychology Faculty of Life and Health Sciences University of Ulster.

  • Hyland, P., Fox, R., Treacy, G., Maguire, P., Boduszek, D., & Vallieres, F. (2017). Assessing the factorial validity of the Attitudes and Belief Scale 2-abbreviated version: A call for the development a gold standard method of measuring rational and irrational beliefs. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 35(2), 111–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, P., Shevlin, M., Adamson, G., & Boduszek, D. (2014). Modeling the structure of the Attitudes and Belief Scale 2 using CFA and bifactor approaches: Toward the development of an abbreviated version. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 43(1), 60–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R. G. (1969). A factored measure of Ellis’s irrational belief system with personality and maladjustment correlates. (Doctoral Dissertation, Texas Technological College, 1968). Dissertation Abstracts International, 69, 6443.

  • Joreskog, K. G. (1999). How larger can a standardized coefficient be? Retrieved December 4, 2018, from http://www.ssicentral.com/lisrel/techdocs/HowLargeCanaStandardizedCoefficientbe.pdf

  • Kalaycı, Ş. (2005). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayınları.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., & Shahar, G. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 151–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD’s brief self-report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs: cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of Testing, 6(4), 311–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2001). Research in education: A conceptual introduction. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moradi, F., Bahrami, H., & Akhgar, G. (2010). Defensive mechanism and irrational beliefs in students. Contemporary Psychology Quarterly (Extra version). No 5, pp. 704–706. Retrieved January 15, 2019 from www.sid.ir.

  • Orcan, F. (2018). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: which one to use first? Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, 9(4), 414–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podina, I., Jucan, A., & David, D. (2015). Self-compassion: A buffer in the pathway from maladaptive beliefs to depression. An exploratory study. Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies, 15(1), 97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prud’homme, L., & Baron, P. (1988). Irrational beliefs and ethnic background: Ellis’ theory revisited. Applied Psychology, 37(3), 301–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rietveld, T., & Van Hout, R. (1993). Statistical techniques for the study of language and language behaviour. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Şahin, N. H., & Durak, A. (1994). Kısa Semptom Envanteri: Türk gençleri için uyarlanması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 9(31), 44–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sava, F. A. (2009). Maladaptive schemas, irrational beliefs, and their relationship with the five-factor personality model. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies, 9(2), 135–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, T. A., & Sass, D. A. (2011). Rotation criteria and hypothesis testing for exploratory factor analysis: Implications for factor pattern loadings and interfactor correlations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71(1), 95–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Şimşek, Ö. F. (2013). Self-absorption paradox is not a paradox: Illuminating the dark side of self-consciousness. International Journal of Psychology, 48(6), 1109–1121.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleri: Temel Kavramlar ve Örnek Uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terjesen, M. D., Salhany, J., & Sciutto, M. J. (2009). A psychometric review of measures of irrational beliefs: Implications for psychotherapy. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 27(2), 83–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlachopoulos, S., Ntoumanis, N., & Smith, L. (2010). The basic psychological needs in exercise scale: Translation and evidence for cross-cultural validity. International Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 8, 394–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yurtal-Dinç, F. (1999). Üniversite öğrencilerinin akılcı olmayan inançlarının bazı değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Ankara: Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüs.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Maltepe University, Marmara Egitim Koyu, 34857, Maltepe, Istanbul, Turkey

    Murat Artiran

  2. Affiliated Center of the Albert Ellis Institute-Turkey, Istanbul, Turkey

    Murat Artiran

  3. Department of Psychology, St. John’s University, Marillac Hall, Room 113, New York, NY, USA

    Raymond DiGiuseppe

  4. The Albert Ellis Institute, New York, NY, USA

    Raymond DiGiuseppe

Authors
  1. Murat Artiran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raymond DiGiuseppe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Murat Artiran.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Artiran, M., DiGiuseppe, R. A Turkish Translation of a Measure of Irrational and Rational Beliefs: Reliability, Validity Studies and Confirmation of the Four Cognitive Processes Model. J Rat-Emo Cognitive-Behav Ther 38, 369–398 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-020-00340-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-020-00340-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation