Cognitive Distortion Scale (CDS) PDF

Cognitive Distortion Scale (CDS) Course code: MPY1104 Introduction What is cognitive distortion ? People operate on the basis of assumptions about themselves, others, environment, and the future. When these assumptions are inaccurate, unnecessarily negative, and interfere with optima...

Cognitive Distortion Scale (CDS) Course code: MPY1104 Introduction What is cognitive distortion ? People operate on the basis of assumptions about themselves, others, environment, and the future. When these assumptions are inaccurate, unnecessarily negative, and interfere with optimal functioning they often are referred as cognitive distortions. Such inaccurate negative thinking make clinical impacts both on subjective internal states and in terms of motivating maladaptive behaviour.  Author/Developer Cognitive distortion Scale was developed by John Briere (2000), He was president of the International Society Of Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS). Some of his research interests include psychological trauma, Complex trauma, PTSD, child maltreatment. John is the author/co-author of over 140 articles, 15 books and trauma related psychological tests. He is co-developer (with Cheryl Lanktree, PhD) of John Briere, Ph.D integrated Treatment of Complex Trauma for Adolescents (ITCT-A). Cognitive Distortion Scale Produces meaningful, standardized T scores based on normative data from a large sample of the general population. It measures five cognitive distortions that appear to have a major therapeutic influence. Concise and easy to understand for the ordinary mental health client Have high psychometric qualities Relevant to a wide range of clinical disorders and etiologies. CDS is not a diagnostic tool but rather a screening assessment tool  40 Items 10-15 mins 5 Sub-scales Characteristics Individual or group 5 point Likert 8 items in each scale subscale  Subscales and Interpratatons Helplessness (HLP) Hopelessness (HOP) Self-criticism (SC) -Unable to be in -Believes that one is - Self esteem. control of their own destined to suffer and - Self devaluation. life. the future is bleak. Self-Blame (SB) Preoccupation with -Blaming oneself for danger (PWD) negative events that -Viewing the world may or may not be in as dangerous or control of the scary. individual.  Theoretical/Historical background Cognitive distortions are negatively biased errors in thinking that are purported to increase vulnerability to depression (Dozois & Beck, 2008). Cognitive distortions were first noted down and described by Beck et al. (1979). Burns (1980) subsequently expanded on their list and identified 10 common depresso-typic thinking errors. These include :- Mindreading (assuming that others are thinking negatively about oneself) Catastrophizing ( making negative predictions about the future based on little or no evidence) Labeling (classifying oneself negatively after the occurrence of an adverse event) Mental filtering (focusing on negative information and devaluing positive information) CEQ (Cognitive errors questionnaire) model also measures 4 major cognitive errors: catastrophizing, overgeneralization, personalization and selective abstraction. the tools was later adapted for children as well (CNCEQ).  Theoretical/Historical background In 1976, American psychiatrist Aaron T. Beck first proposed the cognitive distortion theory. He worked with depressed patients that helped him see that underlying negative beliefs were the root cause of depression, which prompted him to come up with the theory. Cognitive triad is used to describe negative views of depressed individuals about themselves, the world, and the future. As compared to tests of negative affect or dysfunctional personality traits, there is a surprising dearth of clinical, standardized multi scale measures of distorted or negative cognitions (Briere, 1997). Aaron T. Beck Revisions The scale has not been through any revisions, and the original is still used in clinical practice and research. Although cognitive distortions figure prominently in cognitive theory and therapy, a dearth of research has examined the mechanisms through which cognitive distortions impact subsequent psychological distress.  Psychometric properties Reliability Validity 0.89 to 0.97 0.94 to 0.98 The consistency of scores Extent to which a test obtained from one set of measures what it is claims measure to another. to measure. Evaluation of the test Merits and De-merits  Merits Demerits suitable for both research not adapted for and clinical settings individuals under 18 Concise and easy to not culturally relevant on understand for the a greater scale ordinary mental health client Have high psychometric qualities Relevant to a wide range of clinical disorders and etiologies. Applications of the test Clinical setting Research purposes Research and CDS Table 2 Author/s Year Study Cognitive Distortion as a Zainah et al. 2011 Predictor towards Depression among Delinquent Adolescents N - 30 male delinquent adolescents Scales - CDS & RADS Correlation study between personality traits and cognitive Maheshwari & distortions 2021 Chadha N- 200 Age - 18 - 24 Graduate and post graduate students Scales - CDS & NEO-FFI  Test - 1 Aim To assess negative thinking patterns that interfere with optimal functioning in ages 18 and above, using CDS scale Materials Required Stationery ( pen, pencil, ruler, eraser) CDS Test Booklet CDS Profile Form A sheet to make behavioral observations Subject Demographic details: Extra sheet (if needed) Name - MB Gender - F Age - 20  Procedure The administrator arranged the materials and called the participant to the laboratory. S/he was made to sit comfortably, rapport was established and informed consent was taken. The participant was briefed about the instructions of the test. Participant was then requested the fill the CDS test booklet. After the completion of the test, the booklet was collected back and scored by the administrator on the profile form. Further, they were debriefed regarding the rationale and purpose of the test and thanked for their participation in the same.  Instructions: This is the CDS test booklet. First, read the instructions on the first page of the booklet. When you are done, fill out the information requested at the top of the second page. This booklet describes a number of thoughts that you may or may not have had. Read each statement carefully, and then indicate how often you have had this thought or feeling in the last month by circling the correct number. Please answer each item honestly as you can. Be sure to answer every item. You can take as much time as you need to finish the CDS. Do you have any questions? Precautions: No printing errors in the booklet (clear and visible) Give clear instructions (repeat it again) Quiet environment ( less distractions) Well illuminated room  Scoring Ethical Summation of the individual values of considerations each sub-scale to obtain the raw score. Informed consent was obtained If the participant has not answered one from the participant. of the items it will be marked 1*. If Information obtained during the there are more than 2 items under the data collection was kept same sub-scale that have been left confidential. unanswered; the entire sub-scale’s Participant was debriefed about the score will be considered invalid. results at the end of the Symbol - * conduction. Later, with the raw scores, T scores are written in the profile form.  Data Behavioral collection: observations: Data was collected through the CDS test booklet. The participant circles the number Calm and composed. which suits best for him/her. Took longer to complete The numbers are added the first half of the test together to get the values of relative to the second half each sub dimension and of the test. analyzed through the profile form. Table 3 Interpretation of the Received Raw Scores and T scores S.No. Sub -scale Raw Score T-Score Interpretation 1 Self- criticism (SC) 27 78 Clinically Significant 26 86 Clinically Significant 2 Self -blame (SB) Clinically Significant 21 72 3 Helplessness (HLP) 4 Hopelessness (HOP) 27 78 Clinically Significant 5 Preoccupation with 33-40 _ >100 Clinically Significant Danger (PWD)  Discussion: The subject MB is a 20 year old Female who was administered with CDS John Briere (2000) on 7/8/2024. to assess the cognitive distortions and dysfunctional thinking patterns across 5 subscales: Self-Criticism (SC) : The subject has obtained a raw score of 27 and a T-score of 78 in the Self- Criticism (SC) subscale, which can be interpreted as clinically significant. This indicated that the subject may have a tendency to view herself negatively, often report repetitive negative thoughts, and AddThe engage in self deprecating behavior. a little bitrequires subject of body text evaluation and intervention as it immediate may hinder the optimal functioning of the subject. Self-Blame (SB) : The subject has obtained a raw score of 26 and a T-score of 86 in the Self- Blame (SB) subscale, which can be interpreted as clinically significant. This indicated that the subject may have tendency to blame herself for any negative unwanted events that have transpired in her life.The subject requires immediate evaluation and intervention as it may hinder the optimal functioning of the subject Discussion: Helplessness (HLP) : The subject has obtained a raw score of 21 and a T-score of 72 in the Helplessness (HLP) subscale, which can be interpreted as clinically significant. This indicated that the subject may have a tendency to believe that her efforts will be futile. She has the tendency to feel loss of control over the circumstances around her. The subject requires immediate evaluation and intervention as it may hinder the optimal functioning of the subject. Add Hopelessness (HOP) : The subject hasaobtained little bita of rawbody score text of 27 and a T-score of 78 in the Hopelessness (HOP) subscale, which can be interpreted as clinically significant. This indicated that the subject may have tendency to believe that the future is bleak, and that she is destined to fail. The subject requires immediate evaluation and intervention as it may hinder the optimal functioning of the subject Preoccupation with Danger (PWD): The subject has obtained a raw score of 33-40 and a T-score of more than/equal to 100 in the Preoccupation with Danger (PWD) subscale, which can be interpreted as clinically significant. This indicated that the subject may have a tendency to view the world, especially the interpersonal domain, as a dangerous place. She has a tendency to believe that objectively benign circumstances contain risk of negative emotional or physical outcome. The subject requires immediate evaluation and intervention as it may hinder the optimal functioning of the subject. SUMMARY The subject MB is a 20 year old female who was assessed for negative thinking patterns using the CDS (Briere, 2000). She has obtained clinically significant scores across all the subdimensions in the scale. This indicates that the individual may be exhibiting notable cognitive distortions that could impact their optimal functioning.  References Briere J, (2011). CDS: Professional manual. Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources. Maheshwari, K., & Chadha, Y. (2021). Correlation study between personality traits and cognitive distortions. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 9(1), 2349-3429. Cohen, R. J., & Swerdlik, M. E. (2017). Psychological testing and assessment (9th ed.). McGraw- Hill Education Singh N., Yadav R., Singh G., Dhiman C., (2011). Adolescent depression in relation to cognitive distortion. Journal of Mental Health and Human Behaviour. Rnic, K., Dozois, D. J., & Martin, R. A. (2016). Cognitive Distortions, Humor Styles, and Depression. Europe's journal of psychology, 12(3), 348–362. Berndt, D. J., Petzel, T. P., & Berndt, S. M. (1980). Development and Initial Evaluation of a Multiscore Depression Inventory. Journal of Personality PRESENTED BY: CHIDHVILASINI RAMESH 246413068 CHINMAYI RAVI 246413081 RASHI GANAGE 246413136  THANK YOU FOR LISTENING !