how do adolescents define depression? - cIRcle - University of ...

Preliminary Analyses
Chapter IV: Results
Prior to statistical analysis, the data were examined using the procedures outlined by
Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) for screening data. Results from the variables implemented in the
regression analyses were screened for violations of assumptions using the procedures suggested
by Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) and de Vaus (2002). In developing the various measures,
participants were included if they had answered at least 80% of items for each scale. Less than
5% of the participants were missing any data points (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001) in this study.
SPSS (Version 13) Frequencies histograms were further used to check on accuracy for the
normality of distributions, and their shapes were examined using SPSS Graphs (Version 13). The
means (Al), minimum and maximum values, standard deviations (SD), skewness, kurtosis, and
range of the scores, were inspected for plausibility. Both visual inspection and the coefficients
for skewness and kurtosis were examined to detect departures from normality (de Vaus, 2002;
Stevens, 1992; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). Skewness values were found to be within the
acceptable range (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). The kurtosis on social perspective coordination,
the 4+ Rel-Q, had a minor deviation from normality (see Table 27). However, the impact of
skewness and kurtosis diminishes for larger samples of 100 or more (de Vaus, 2002; Tabachnick
and Fidell, 2001) or 200+ (Waternaux, 1976), leading to the conclusion that the data set could be
used without transforming the scores on this measure to obtain more normal distributions.
Upon visual inspection, the distributions of the emotion regulation scales: Anger
Management: Coping; Anger Dysregulated-Expression; Sadness Management: Inhibition; and
Sadness Dysregulated-Expression, showed a departure from normal distribution (Tabachnick &
Fidell, 2001). These variables were not retained in multivariate analyses to help avoid Type I
error (see also Methods Chapter for reliabilities of scales). The emotion regulation scales that
were kept in multivariate analyses were the Anger Management: Inhibition (a = .79) and the
Sadness Management: Coping (a = .53). Although the reliability for the Sadness Management:
Coping was low, this scale remained in multivariate analyses as it was the only sadness
regulation scale that did not depart from normal distribution, and reliability of a = .50 on
emotion scales have been used in previous studies (J. L Zeman, personal communication, March
6, 2007). The scales: depressive symptomatology; social perspective coordination; poor emotion
awareness; expressive reluctance; sadness management coping; and anger management
126