Psychometric Properties of Templer’s Death Anxiety Scale in Two University Cohorts in Spain

Résumé fourni par la source

Introduction: Death anxiety is a salient psychological construct across the adult lifespan; however, few studies have examined the psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Death Anxiety Scale (DAS) in university populations spanning diverse age ranges. Objectives: To evaluate the factorial structure, model fit, and reliability of the Spanish DAS in a heterogeneous academic cohort comprising traditional (younger) and non-traditional (older) adult learners. Methods: A total of 928 participants (aged 18–93 years) from a Spanish university completed the DAS. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis (EFA; principal axis factoring with oblique rotation) to identify latent dimensions, followed by a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate model fit. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega, and associations with sociodemographic variables (age, religious belief) were explored. Results: EFA supported a two-factor solution comprising Fear of Death and Peacefulness/Serenity towards Death. Factor reliability was acceptable (α = 0.818 and 0.734; total α = 0.789; ω_total ≈ 0.81). CFA indicated good fit to the two-factor model (χ2(89) = 401.19, RMSEA = 0.064, 90% CI [0.058–0.071], CFI = 0.940, TLI = 0.912, SRMR = 0.063), with information criteria (AIC = 17,018.33; BIC = 17,236.77) supporting model parsimony. Age and religious belief showed small-to-moderate associations with response patterns. Conclusions: The Spanish DAS demonstrates adequate factorial validity and reliability in a university sample spanning a wide age range. The identification of a Peacefulness/Serenity dimension may enrich interpretation, although its distinctiveness should be considered provisional and warrants replication. Future research should examine measurement invariance across age groups and assess applicability in clinical and longitudinal contexts.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.