Psychometric Properties of the Detachment and Compartmentalization Inventory (DCI) in an Italian Community Sample

ABSTRACT

The Detachment and Compartmentalization Inventory (DCI) is a valid and reliable self-report instrument that assesses these two distinct forms of dissociative symptoms. However, there is limited research on the cross-cultural validation of the DCI. Therefore, this study aimed to develop an Italian translation of the DCI and examine its internal structure and psychometric properties (including internal consistency, convergent validity, and test-retest reliability) within an Italian-speaking community sample. The sample consisted of 1276 adults (887 females; mean age: 29.57 ± 10.96 years), who completed the DCI and other self-report measures evaluating dissociative experiences and childhood trauma. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the original two-factor model (χ²₁₆₉ = 1312.80, RMSEA = 0.073, 95%CI 0.069–0.077; CFI = 0.94; TLI = 0.94; SRMR = 0.04). Additionally, the DCI exhibited good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent validity with another measure of dissociation. The study also confirmed the association between DCI scores and the severity of childhood trauma. Finally, a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrated that the DCI effectively distinguishes individuals who screened positively for dissociative disorders. Overall, these findings indicate that the Italian translation of the DCI possesses satisfactory psychometric properties, suggesting its utility as a screening tool for assessing detachment and compartmentalization experiences.

KEYWORDS:

• Dissociation
• detachment
• compartmentalization
• confirmatory factor analysis
• assessment

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the first author upon reasonable request.

Author contributions

CI: conceptualization, data analysis, methodology, writing – original draft; AS: conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – original draft; GR: methodology, data curation, data analysis, writing – review & editing; GS: conceptualization, data curation; EDR: methodology, data curation, writing – review & editing; MI: Data analysis, supervision, writing – review & editing; MA: conceptualization, methodology, writing – review & editing; GAC: data curation, methodology, writing – review & editing; RBA: conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – review & editing; BF: conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – original draft.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2024.2323982

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.