Psychometric properties and factor structure analysis of the inventory of statements about self-injury (ISAS) in a Russian non-clinical sample

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The “Inventory of Statements About Self-Injury” (ISAS) is one of the most widely used and reliable psychometric tools for assessing non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and its motivations. The Russian adaptation of the ISAS, involving patients with nonpsychotic psychiatric disorders, demonstrated high internal consistency and a two-factor structure similar to the original. However, the reliability and suitability of ISAS in a non-clinical population remain unclear.

AIM: To adapt the ISAS in Russian, evaluate its psychometric properties, and analyze its factor structure in a sample of Russian university students.

METHODS: The psychometric properties and factor structure of the adapted ISAS version were evaluated through an anonymous online survey of Russian university students. Respondents had reported lifetime NSSI and scored above 4 on the ISAS-Functions subscale. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA/CFA) were performed on two randomly formed subgroups to evaluate the factor structure of ISAS. Additionally, the associations between the identified ISAS factors and the presence of suicidal thoughts and attempts over a lifetime and in the week before their participation in the study, as well as seeking psychiatric and/or psychotherapeutic care over a lifetime, were analyzed.

RESULTS: The survey included 3,919 participants, of whom 1,149 (29.3%; 88.0% female) reported NSSI, with a median age of 20 (18; 22) years. The Russian ISAS demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.851). EFA results supported the original two-factor structure. CFA results suggested an alternative three-factor structure of the ISAS, including “Signal”, “Regulation”, and “Influence” factors. Suicidal attempts were associated with the factors “Regulation” and “Influence”, suicidal thoughts with “Regulation” and female gender, and the seeking of psychiatric and/or psychotherapeutic care with “Regulation” and age.

CONCLUSION: The adapted ISAS in Russian is a reliable tool with high internal consistency. The study proposed a three-factor structure, indicating a greater heterogeneity of the NSSI phenomenon compared to earlier understandings. The study demonstrated the association between two of the three identified factors with suicidal behavior and thoughts, and the seeking of psychiatric care.

Keywords

non-suicidal self-injury / self-harm / questionnaire / ISAS / adaptation / factor analysis

References

[1] Klonsky ED, Victor SE, Saffer BY. Nonsuicidal Self-Injury: What We Know, and What We Need to Know. Can J Psychiatry. 2014;59(11):565–568. doi: 10.1177/070674371405901101

[2] Swannell SV, Martin GE, Page A, et al. Prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury in nonclinical samples: systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2014;44(3):273–303. doi: 10.1111/sltb.12070

[3] Cheng H, Wang D, Wang L, et al. Global prevalence of self-harm during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Psychol. 2023;11(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s40359-023-01181-8

[4] Grandclerc S, De Labrouhe D, Spodenkiewicz M, et al. Relations between Nonsuicidal Self-Injury and Suicidal Behavior in Adolescence: A Systematic Review. PLoS One. 2016;11(4):e0153760. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153760

[5] Chesin MS, Galfavy H, Sonmez CC, et al. Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Is Predictive of Suicide Attempts Among Individuals with Mood Disorders. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2017;47(5):567–579. doi: 10.1111/sltb.12331

[6] Willoughby T, Heffer T, Hamza CA. The link between nonsuicidal self-injury and acquired capability for suicide: A longitudinal study. J Abnorm Psychol. 2015;124(4):1110–1115. doi: 10.1037/abn0000104

[7] Klonsky ED. The functions of deliberate self-injury: a review of the evidence. Clin Psychol Rev. 2007;27(2):226–229. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2006.08.002

[8] Faura-Garcia J, Orue I, Calvete E. Clinical assessment of non-suicidal self-injury: A systematic review of instruments. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2021;28(4):739–765. doi: 10.1002/cpp.2537

[9] Klonsky ED, Glenn CR. Assessing the Functions of Non-suicidal Self-injury: Psychometric Properties of the Inventory of Statements About Self-injury (ISAS). J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2009;31(3):215–219. doi: 10.1007/s10862-008-9107-z

[10] Zinchuk M, Kustov G, Popova S, et al. Functions of nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior in Russian patients with suicidal ideation. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1270944. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1270944

[11] Graeff TR. Response Bias. In: Encyclopedia of Social Measurement. Vol. 3. Boston, London: Elsevier; 2005. p. 411–418. doi: 10.1016/B0-12-369398-5/00037-2

[12] Habibzadeh F, Habibzadeh P, Yadollahie M. On determining the most appropriate test cut-off value: the case of tests with continuous results. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2016;26(3):297–307. doi: 10.11613/BM.2016.034

[13] Taber KS. The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Res Sci Educ. 2018;48(1):1273–1296. doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2

[14] Cristobal E, Flavian C, Guinalíu M. Perceived e-service quality (PeSQ): measurement validation and effects on consumer satisfaction and web site loyalty. Managing Service Quality. 2007;17(3):317–340. doi: 10.1108/09604520710744326

[15] Chan LL, Idris N. Validity and Reliability of The Instrument Using Exploratory Factor Analysis and Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci. 2017;7(10):400–410. doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i10/3387

[16] Streiner DL. Figuring out factors: the use and misuse of factor analysis. Can J Psychiatry. 1994;39(3):135–140. doi: 10.1177/070674379403900303

[17] Tavakol M, Wetzel A. Factor Analysis: a means for theory and instrument development in support of construct validity. Int J Med Educ. 2020;11:245–247. doi: 10.5116/ijme.5f96.0f4a

[18] Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. Sociol Methods Res. 1992;21(2):230–258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005

[19] Finch WH. Using Fit Statistic Differences to Determine the Optimal Number of Factors to Retain in an Exploratory Factor Analysis. Educ Psychol Meas. 2020;80(2):217–241. doi: 10.1177/0013164419865769

[20] Kim S, Kim Y, Hur JW. Nonsuicidal Self-Injury among Korean Young Adults: A Validation of the Korean Version of the Inventory of Statements about Self-Injury. Psychiatry Investig. 2019;16(4):270–278. doi: 10.30773/pi.2019.01.23

[21] Bildik T, Somer O, Kabukçu Başay B, et al. [The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the inventory of statements about self-injury]. Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2013;24(1):49–57. Turkish. doi: 10.5080/u6901

[22] Nisar H, Aqeel M, Ahmad A. Indigenous need arise to protect human from self-harm behavior in Pakistan: translation and validation of inventory of statements about self-injury. Int J Human Rights Healthcare. 2020;13(5):421–433. doi: 10.1108/IJHRH-10-2019-0080

[23] Kortge R, Meade T, Tennant A. Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Functions of Deliberate Self-Harm (DSH): A Psychometric Examination of the Inventory of Statements About Self-Injury (ISAS) Scale. Behav Chang. 2013;30(1):24–35. doi: 10.1017/bec.2013.3

[24] Vigfusdottir J, Dale KY, Gratz KL, et al. The psychometric properties and clinical utility of the Norwegian versions of the deliberate self-harm inventory and the inventory of statements about self-injury. Curr Psychol. 2022;41:6766–6776. doi: 10.1007/s12144-020-01189-y

[25] Nock MK, Prinstein MJ. A functional approach to the assessment of self-mutilative behavior. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72950:885–890. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.5.885

[26] McAuliffe C, Arensman E, Keeley HS, et al. Motives and suicide intent underlying hospital treated deliberate self-harm and their association with repetition. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2007;37(4):397–408. doi: 10.1521/suli.2007.37.4.397

[27] Orri M, Paduanello M, Lachal J, et al. Qualitative approach to attempted suicide by adolescents and young adults: the (neglected) role of revenge. PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e96716. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096716

[28] Ivey-Stephenson AZ, Crosby AE, Hoenig JM, et al. Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors Among Adults Aged ≥18 Years — United States, 2015–2019. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2022;71(1):1–19. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss7101a1

[29] Heilbron N, Compton JS, Daniel SS, et al. The problematic label of suicide gesture: Alternatives for clinical research and practice. Prof Psychol Res Pract. 2010;41(3):221–227. doi: 10.1037/a0018712

[30] Iijima Y, Uemura M, Katsuragwa T, et al. Development of the Japanese version of the inventory of statements about self-injury and classification of nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents based on its functions. J Health Psychol Res. 2020;33(2):103–104. doi: 10.11560/JHPR.200511141

[31] Hanel PH, Vione KC. Do Student Samples Provide an Accurate Estimate of the General Public? PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0168354. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168354

[32] Victor SE, Muehlenkamp JJ, Hayes NA, et al. Characterizing gender differences in nonsuicidal self-injury: Evidence from a large clinical sample of adolescents and adults. Compr Psychiatry. 2018;82:53–60. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.01.009

[33] Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(1):1417–1432. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-n

[34] Glenn CR, Klonsky ED. One-year test-retest reliability of the Inventory of Statements about Self-Injury (ISAS). Assessment. 2011;18(3):375–378. doi: 10.1177/1073191111411669

[35] Al-Shannaq Y, Aldalaykeh M. Suicide literacy, suicide stigma, and psychological help seeking attitudes among Arab youth. Curr Psychol. 2023;42(8):6532–6544. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-02007-9

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Kibitov A.A., Potanin S.S., Yagina O.M., Borodin V.I., Morozova M.A.