Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rumination, a transdiagnostic factor in different psychopathological conditions, is believed to be activated and sustained by dysfunctional metacognition. The Positive Beliefs about Rumination Scale (PBRS) and the Negative Beliefs about Rumination Scale (NBRS) have been used to measure the metacognitive beliefs of rumination and have been investigated in many cultural contexts. However, it remains unclear whether these scales can work as well for the Chinese population. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the psychometric properties of the Chinese versions of these scales and to test the metacognitive model of rumination for students with different levels of depression. METHODS: The PBRS and NBRS were forward-backward translated into Mandarin. In total 1,025 college students were recruited to complete a battery of web-based questionnaires. Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and correlation analysis were used to test the structure, validity, and reliability of the two scales, as well as their item correlations with rumination. RESULTS: A new two-factor structure of the PBRS (rather than the original one-factor model) and a new three-factor structure of the NBRS (rather than the original two-factor model) were extracted. The goodness-of-fit indices of these two factor models showed they had a good to very good fit with the data. The internal consistency and construct validity of PBRS and NBRS were also affirmed. CONCLUSION: The Chinese versions of the PBRS and the NBRS were generally shown to be reliable and valid, but their newly extracted structures fit the Chinese college students better than their original structures. These new models of PBRS and NBRS are of value to be further explored in Chinese population.