Purpose: The Demoralization scale (DS-I) is a validated and frequently used instrument to assess existential distress in patients with cancer and other severe medical illness. The purpose of this study was to provide normative values derived from a representative German general population sample and to analyze the correlational structure of the DS-I. Methods: A representative sample of the adult German general population completed the DS-I (24 Items), the Emotion Thermometers (ET) measuring distress, anxiety, depression, anger, need for help, and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale (FACIT-fatigue). Results: The sample consists of N = 2,407 adults (mean age = 49.8; range = 18–94 years), 55.7% women). The percentages of participants above the DS-I cutoff (30) was 13.5%. The mean scores of the DS-I dimensions were as follows: (1) loss of meaning and purpose: M = 2.78 SD = 4.49; (2) disheartenment: M = 3.19 SD = 4.03; (3) dysphoria M = 4.51 SD = 3.20; (4) sense of failure: M = 6.24 SD = 3.40; and for the DS-I total score: M = 16.72 SD = 12.74. Women reported significantly higher levels of demoralization than men, with effect sizes between d = 0.09 (Loss of Meaning) and d = 0.21 (Dysphoria). Age was not associated with demoralization in our sample. DS-I reliability was excellent (a = 0.94) and DS-I subscales were interrelated (r between 0.31 and 0.87) and significantly correlated with ET, especially depression, anxiety, and need for help and fatigue (r between 0.14 and 0.69). Conclusions: In order to use the DS-I as a screening tool in clinical practice and research the normative values are essential for comparing the symptom burden of groups of patients within the health care system to the general population. Age and sex differences between groups of patients can be accounted for using the presented normative scores of the DS-I.

D'après des études récentes, le lien qui unit les propriétés objectives de la peine (c.-à-d. la sévérité, la certitude et la célérité de la peine) et les propriétés telles que perçues par les délinquants potentiels serait faible, voire inexistant. Par conséquent, les politiques publiques s'appuyant sur le paradigme dissuasif seraient inefficaces pour réduire la criminalité. Toutefois, ces études s'appuient sur un modèle conceptuel limité qui sous-entend que la peine produirait uniquement de la dissuasion. Cette étude vise donc à tester un modèle élargi de prévention générale qui intègre à la fois les notions de dissuasion et de validation normative. D'après ce modèle, l'effet préventif de la peine pourrait s'effectuer à travers les valeurs et les croyances des délinquants potentiels, et ce sans nécessairement modifier leurs perceptions de la peine. Afin de vérifier l'utilité d'un tel modèle, des données ont été colligées à l'aide d'un sondage sur les habitudes de conduite de 448 jeunes conducteurs québécois. Les résultats indiquent que les mécanismes dissuasifs, tels que la certitude perçue d'arrestation et la sévérité perçue des peines, n'ont pas d'effet significatif sur l'intention délictuelle des automobilistes. Toutefois, les valeurs et les croyances de l'automobiliste jouent un rôle essentiel dans la décision d'adopter un comportement routier respectueux des lois. Les automobilistes percevant les problématiques de sécurité routière (c.-à-d. alcool au volant ou vitesse) comme graves auraient moins d'intentions délinquantes. Ces valeurs et ces croyances seraient modulées à la fois par les expériences d'impunité et par le niveau d'exposition aux différentes activités policières sur les routes. Ces résultats suggèrent que l'application des lois peut produire un effet préventif sans nécessairement que des mécanismes dissuasifs en soient responsables. / Recent studies indicate that the link between aggregate punishment level (i.e. severity, certainty and celerity of punishment) and perceived punishment level is virtually non-existent. Thus, deterrence-based politics should be avoided because they are ineffective to reduce criminality. However, the deterrence model used in those studies is limited and implies that punishment only produces a deterrent effect. The goal of this study is to test an expanded model of general prevention that integrates the notions of deterrence and normative validation. Based on this model, the preventive effect of punishment could work through the moral beliefs of the potential delinquant, without changing his perceived punishment level. In order to test our model, a survey was conducted among 448 young drivers living in the Province of Quebec, Canada. Results show that deterrence-based variables, like certainty of arrest and perceived severity of punishment, have little to no effect on the intent of the motorist to commit an infraction. However, other inhibitions, such as one's moral beliefs and perceived seriousness of road safety problems (e.g drunk driving and speeding), play an essential role in the decision of the motorist to adopt a law-abiding driving behavior. Yet, these moral beliefs are influenced by the experiences of punishment avoidance, and by the level of policing exposure. These results suggest that a variation in the threat of road sanctions could have a preventive effect without necessarily having an effect on the perceived punishment level of the motorist.

No description available.