scholarly journals Three components of individualism

2002 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 163-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anu Realo ◽  
Kati Koido ◽  
Eva Ceulemans ◽  
Jüri Allik
Keyword(s):  
Principal Component Analysis ◽  
Social Relationships ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
Social Relation ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Individualism And Collectivism ◽  
Convergent And Divergent Validity

In this article, following an assumption that individualism and collectivism are separate factors, we have further established that three central components of individualism can be distinguished. In the first part of the article we examined whether the three proposed components of individualism—autonomy, mature self‐responsibility, and uniqueness—can be distinguished from each other in one cultural context, Estonia. A new scale was developed to measure the three aspects of individualism which demonstrated both the reasonable internal‐consistency reliability as well as convergent and divergent validity with several other measures of individualism and collectivism and related constructs. In the second part of the article we studied whether individualism generalizes across specific contexts or domains of social relationships, namely, across relations with family and close others; friends and peers; state and nation. The results of the three‐mode principal component analysis showed that the individualistic tendencies of the respondents did not differ much while measured toward the three types of social relation. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The HEXACO-Middle School Inventory (MSI)

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 681-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ida Sergi ◽  
Augusto Gnisci ◽  
Vincenzo P. Senese ◽  
Marco Perugini
Keyword(s):  
Middle School ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
Convergent And Divergent Validity ◽  
Italian Children

Abstract. We developed and validated a novel measure, the 6-factor personality HEXACO-Middle School Inventory (MSI). We started with a pool of 16 items for each of the six dimensions of the HEXACO. In Study 1, we administered the HEXACO-MSI to 1,089 Italian children and the Observer version to their parents. Using principal component analyses (PCA) and extension factor analysis (EFA), we selected the best eight items for each dimension. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed the 6-factor dimensionality and its invariance. Internal consistency of each dimension was adequate. Convergent and divergent validity were successfully established with a version of the scale filled by parents. Convergent validity was also established with the Big Five Questionnaire – Children (BFQ-Children) whereas divergent validity was less clear-cut. Conscientiousness, Honesty-Humility, and eXtraversion demonstrated predictive validity of school marks (criterion validity). In Study 2 ( N = 317), we replicated dimensionality, internal consistency, and established test-retest reliability of each dimension in two measurements at a 1 month distance. The HEXACO-MSI showed a clear personality structure organized in six traits, and evidence of predictive validity of relevant school criteria particularly via Conscientiousness, Honesty-Humility, and eXtraversion.

scholarly journals Reliability, validity, and clinical utility of a culturally modified Kessler scale (MK-K5) in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Makayla-May Brinckley ◽  
Bianca Calabria ◽  
Jennie Walker ◽  
Katherine A. Thurber ◽  
Raymond Lovett
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Torres Strait Islander ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Convergent And Divergent Validity ◽  
Torres Strait

Abstract Background Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are the first people of Australia. Consequences of historic and contemporary settler-colonialism including racism, trauma, grief and loss (of land, culture, spirituality, and freedoms) have led to substantial negative health and wellbeing impacts. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scales are population and individual-level tools designed to measure general psychological health status. There has been limited assessment of the psychometric properties and validity of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale for use with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population in Australia, despite its widespread use. Methods A national sample of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults (n = 6988 ≥ 16 years) was used in the psychometric assessment of the MK-K5, which involved face validity, acceptability, internal consistency/reliability, construct validity, and convergent and divergent validity testing. Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) curves were produced to assess clinical utility for depression and anxiety screening. Results The MK-K5 demonstrated face validity for psychological distress in two focus groups, and had good acceptability, good internal consistency/reliability (α = 0.89), good construct validity (uni-dimensional; one underlying component explaining 70.1% of variance), and demonstrated convergent and divergent validity in the sample. The MK-K5 had good clinical utility at a cut-off score of 11 for detecting ever being diagnosed with depression or anxiety. Conclusions The MK-K5 is a valid measure of psychological distress and has clinical utility in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population.

The F-Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale-18 (FMSP-18): Internal consistency, construct, concurrent and divergent validity

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. s286-s286
Author(s):  
M.J. Soares ◽  
A.T. Pereira ◽  
A. Araújo ◽  
D. Silva ◽  
A.P. Amaral ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Principal Component Analysis ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Component Analysis ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Varimax Rotation ◽  
Personal Standards ◽  
Life Orientation Test ◽  
Competing Interest

IntroductionThe FMPS is a 35-item self-report questionnaire to measure perfectionism. It evaluates: concern over mistakes/CM, doubts about actions/DA, parental criticism/PC and expectations/PE, personal standards/PS and organization/O.ObjectivesTo develop a shortened version of FMPS and study its internal consistency, the construct, concurrent and divergent validity.MethodsOne hundred and ninety-two university students (78.1% females), aged 19.74 years (sd = 2.10) completed the Portuguese versions of the: FMPS, Hewitt and Flett MPS/H&FMPS, Life Orientation Test Revised/LOT-R, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory/STAI, and Profile of Mood States/POMS.ResultsCorrelations between each item and corrected FMPS total scores/corrected total subscales scores were ≥ 0.20 for the items 13, 15, 25, 31, 35 and 10, 2, 25, and 26, respectively. The internal consistency of FMPS was high (α: .857) with 32 items contributing for this consistency (exceptions: 13, 25 and 31). The principal component analysis of the 35 items with factors varimax rotation was performed. The three items with higher loading in each factor that also contributed to the FMPS reliability were selected for the FMPS shortened version (FMPS-18). The principal component analysis of the 18 items with factors varimax rotation showed that six factors explained 74.6% of FMPS-18 total variance. These factors revealed adequate internal consistency (α: O = 0.740; PC = 0.859; PE = 0.847; PS = 0.726; CM = 0.740; DA = 0.832; total = 0.768). Convergent correlations between FMPS and the matched FMPS-18 scores were 0.839 to 0.971 (all P < .01). Correlations of the FMPS-18 and FMPS with H&F-MPS, STAI, LOT-R and NA/PA scores were of similar significance and valence.ConclusionFMPS-18 is a brief, reliable and valid instrument to measure perfectionism.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

Convergence and Divergence of Clinical Memory Tests

1988 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 291-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth W. Sewell ◽  
Ronald G. Downey ◽  
E. Robert Sinnett
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Principal Component Analysis ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Moderate Degree ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Memory Functions ◽  
Convergent And Divergent Validity ◽  
Convergence And Divergence ◽  
Major Factors

Although there are many methods used to measure memory, there is surprisingly little agreement as to the validity of these measures. This study was designed to assess the convergent and divergent validity of several different memory measures. 60 college students served as subjects in the study. A moderate degree of convergent validity was found for the memory scales. A principal component analysis gave two major factors, memory for verbal and nonverbal materials. Controlling for intelligence (Quick Test) did not substantially reduce the convergent validity of the memory measures, establishing the divergent validity of memory. While there is a need to assess clinically the memory functions of individuals, the current methods appear to need additional work to improve the level of convergent validity and to reflect the diversity in memory.

“Would You Rather Jump Out of a Perfectly Good Airplane or Develop Cardiovascular Disease?” Validity and Reliability of the Cardiovascular Risk Perception Survey Among Military Personnel

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. E1-E17
Author(s):  
Kathy Prue-Owens ◽  
Helen Graham ◽  
Mythreyi Ramesh
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Principal Component Analysis ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
Risk Perception ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Component Analysis ◽  
Perception Survey

Background and PurposeCardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of death in the United States. The military are viewed as fit, ready to fight and that jumping out of perfectly good airplane or going to war is a greater risk than CVD. The purpose of this study was to determine reliability and validity of the Cardiovascular Risk Perception Survey (CRPS).MethodsA cross-sectional descriptive design was performed, supported by the Health Belief Model. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and validity (principal component analysis) were examined.ResultsFifty-five participants were included in this study. Construct validity of the CRPS was supported by principal component analysis; indicating one scale that measured cardiovascular risk perception. The Cronbach's alpha is reported .865.ConclusionInitial psychometric testing of the CRPS provides evidence for construct validity and internal consistency reliability.

Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Reciprocal Empowerment Scale

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilyn Klakovich
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Evaluation ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Nursing Administration ◽  
Oblique Rotation ◽  
Factor Solution ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Organizational Settings ◽  
Convergent And Divergent Validity

This article reports on the development and evaluation of the Reciprocal Empowerment Scale (RES) which was designed to measure empowerment in the context of the leader-follower relationship in organizational settings. The instrument was developed through a process of retroductive triangulation of theoretical and empirical empowerment literature and results of a qualitative study. Deletion of items not considered valid by a panel of expert judges brought the content validity index to .97. An internal consistency reliability coefficient alpha of .95 was achieved for the RES. Subscale coefficients of .82 to .95 were obtained. Convergent and divergent validity and freedom from social desirability response bias were supported. Principal component extraction with oblique rotation resulted in a three-factor solution: reciprocity, synergy, and ownership. With further testing, the RES should prove useful for nursing administration research and practice.

Development and testing of three unique scales measuring the brand image of nursing

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judi Allyn Godsey ◽  
Tom Hayes ◽  
Clinton Schertzer ◽  
Robert Kallmeyer
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Health Care Access ◽  
Brand Image ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Brand Position ◽  
The Impact

Purpose Nurses have been called to be leaders in the transformation of health care and to help improve health-care access for the nation’s most vulnerable populations. However, to lead health-care transformation, the profession of nurses must first see themselves as leaders. Unfortunately, nursing has been described as lacking cohesiveness and failing to communicate a consistent brand image. No empirically tested quantitative tools exist to measure the brand identity of nursing, making it difficult to assess where the profession stands in regard to the mantel of leadership. The purpose of this study was to develop empirically sound instruments which could measure nurses’ perceptions of their professional brand image. A total of three scales were developed and then tested: The Nursing Brand Image Scale, Nursing’s Current Brand Position Scale and Nursing’s Desired Brand Position Scale. Design/methodology/approach The factor structure and internal consistency reliability of each scale were examined following survey administration to a national sample of registered nurses. Principal component analyses were used to explore the factor structure of each scale. Item reduction was achieved through examination of the loading of items across the factors and the impact of the item on internal consistency reliability. Findings Respondents to the survey were nursing alumni who received a baccalaureate or master’s degree in nursing at a private, mid-western university, and nursing faculty affiliated with a private, collegiate network (n = 286). For all scales, principal component analysis showed no inter-item correlations >0.9 or <0.1. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure for sampling adequacy was high and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (p < 0001). The internal consistency reliability of each of the three scales was good to excellent. Current brand position mean scores were highest for the factor “caring advocates for patients/public”, and lowest on “influential leaders”. The most desired brand position mean scores were highest and rated similarly for factors “influential leaders” and “patient-centered caregivers”. Originality/value This study provides strong preliminary evidence for the factor structure and internal consistency reliability for each of the three scales and represents an important first step toward quantitatively measuring the brand image of nursing. However, results suggest there is work to be done if nursing is to formulate and adopt a brand image that consistently reinforces their role as leaders. Further testing of the scales with other nursing populations, the general public and with larger sample sizes is recommended.

Development of the Adult Scale of Hostility and Aggression: Reactive–Proactive (A-SHARP)

2011 ◽  
Vol 116 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Thomas Matlock ◽  
Michael G Aman
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Physical Aggression ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Verbal Aggression ◽  
Demographic Variables ◽  
Gender Effect ◽  
Intellectual And Developmental Disabilities ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Convergent And Divergent Validity

Abstract In this study, the authors developed the Adult Scale of Hostility and Aggression Reactive–Proactive (A-SHARP). Sixty-one caregivers rated 512 individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities on the A-SHARP. Exploratory factor analysis revealed 5 factors on the Problem Scale: (a) Verbal Aggression, (b) Physical Aggression, (c) Hostile Affect, (d) Covert Aggression, and (e) Bullying. Internal consistency was high, and intercorrelation of subscales suggested logical convergent and divergent validity. Separate scores were also derived for the Provocation Scale, which was developed to reflect motivation for the aggression (reactive vs. proactive). Analyses of demographic variables revealed 1 gender effect, several effects due to age and functional level, and no effect of ethnicity. Normative data are provided for the Problem Scale.

On Cliff's Formula, the Kaiser-Guttman Rule, and the Number of Factors

1992 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 595-598 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry F. Kaiser
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Error ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Principal Components ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
The Other ◽  
Factor Analytic ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Physical Attributes ◽  
The Right

Cliff (1988) has presented a formula for the reliability of a principal component which is different from my long-known formula (Kaiser, 1957, 1991) for coefficient alpha of a principal component. Cliff claims that his approach is “correct” and mine “is the result of a misapplication of the formula for internal consistency reliability” Actually, both developments are correct but are based on different premises: Cliff considers measurement error within—but not between—attributes, while I consider measurement error between—but not within—attributes. The application of my formula to the knotty problem of the “number of factors”—the Kaiser-Guttman Rule—appears often to give the “right” result, when “right” means agreement with the subjective judgment of factor-analytic grandmasters. But when it fails it is approximately equally likely to overfactor as to underfactor. Cliff's formula, on the other hand, when used to establish the number of factors, almost invariably overfactors and, in the limit, as the within-attribute reliabilities all approach one (as with, say, physical attributes), nonsensically will declare all principal components perfectly reliable no matter how small their associated eigenvalues, yielding an absurd answer if used to establish the number of factors.

The H&F-Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale 13 (H&F-MSP13): Construct and convergent validity

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. s287-s287
Author(s):  
M.J. Soares ◽  
A.T. Pereira ◽  
A. Araújo ◽  
D. Silva ◽  
J. Valente ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Principal Component Analysis ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Varimax Rotation ◽  
Valid Instrument ◽  
Good Internal Consistency ◽  
Explained Variance ◽  
Competing Interest

IntroductionThe Hewitt and Flett Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (H&F-MPS) is one of the most used measures of perfectionism. Their 45-items evaluate self-Oriented (SOP), Self-Prescribed (SPP), and Other Oriented (OOP) perfectionism.ObjectivesTo study the internal consistency and convergent validity of the H&F-MSP13.MethodsOne hundred and ninety-two university students (78.1% females), aged 19.74 years (sd = 2.10; range: 17–28) completed the Portuguese versions of H&F-MPS (Soares et al., 2003) and of Frost et al. MPS (F-MPS) (Amaral et al., 2013). Thirteen items were selected from the Portuguese version of the H&F-MPS, based on their loading in the factor (0.60 and over) (Soares et al., 2003).ResultsThe H&FMPS13 revealed good internal consistency (α = 0.816). The corrected item-total subscale Spearman's correlations were high (from 0.418 to 0.820). The principal component analysis with factors varimax rotation produced three factors, which revealed acceptable/good internal consistency (SOP: explained variance/EV = 35.4%, α = .900; SPP: EV = 16.3%, α = 0.695; OOP: EV = 10.8%, α = 0.709). The correlations between the H&F-MSP13 scores and the matching scores of the H&F-MPS were high (from r = 0.745 to r = 0.945, all P < .01), suggesting that both scales measure similarly the constructs. The H&F-MSP13 and the H&F-MPS total scores demonstrate good convergent validity with the total score of F-MPS, as indicated by the correlations (r = 0.581/r = 0.636, respectively). The correlations similarities between the H&F-MSP13 and H&F-MSP dimensions and the F-MPS dimensions and total scores were also considerable.ConclusionsThe H&F-MSP13 is a valid instrument to measure perfectionism that reveals convergent validity with the F-MPS, retaining the adequate psychometric properties of the H&F-MPS and its administration is less time consuming.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document