Premium
Cluster analysis applied to self‐reported depressive symptomatology
Author(s) -
Byrne D. G.
Publication year - 1978
Publication title -
acta psychiatrica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.849
H-Index - 146
eISSN - 1600-0447
pISSN - 0001-690X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1978.tb06869.x
Subject(s) - melancholia , cluster (spacecraft) , depression (economics) , psychology , neuroticism , clinical psychology , rating scale , psychiatry , developmental psychology , cognition , personality , social psychology , computer science , economics , macroeconomics , programming language
The confusion surrounding the classification of the depressive states has been variously attributed to bias in methods of data collection and inappropriate means of data analysis. It has been argued that the application of corrective methods to these postulated sources of error, namely the use of self‐reported data to eliminate bias in data collection, and the analysis of this data by means of cluster analysis, should produce a more consistent outcome to studies of depressive classification. Self‐reported depressive symptomatology for 135 depressed in‐patients, obtained by means of the Zung Self‐Rating Depression Scale, was subjected to a divisive technique of cluster analysis, yielding four clusters of patients. These clusters were clinically interpreted as being composed (1) of severely depressed patients exhibiting a clinical picture resembling that of endogenous depression, (2) of a small number of older patients, severely depressed, whose clinical picture resembled involutional melancholia, (3) of less severely depressed patients having qualitative similarities to those patients composing the first cluster, and (4) of patients reporting depression as a symptom but failing to report substantial levels of further depressive symptomatology. No cluster with clinical features of neurotic depression emerged. In two respects, the emergence of a cluster clinically resembling endogenous depression, and the failure to demonstrate a cluster of neurotic depressives, the results of this study are similar to those reported by Pilowsky et al. (1969). Failure to obtain total agreement between the two studies may be attributed to differences in the nature of the sample, differences in the composition of the data collection instrument, and mathematical differences in the technique of cluster analysis employed. With this in mind, further studies of this nature should place some emphasis on consistent methodology across studies.