Rasch Modeling and Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis for the Usability of the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Musheer A. Aljaberi ◽  
Naser A. Alareqe ◽  
Mousa A. Qasem ◽  
Abdulsamad Alsalahi ◽  
Sarah Noman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Rasch Modeling ◽  
Impact Of Event Scale ◽  
Event Scale ◽  
Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
The Impact

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Impact of Event Scale - Revised

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Orazem ◽  
Claire Hebenstreit ◽  
Daniel King ◽  
Lynda King ◽  
Arieh Shalev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Impact Of Event Scale ◽  
Event Scale ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
The Impact

Rasch Modeling and Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Systemizing Quotient-Revised (SQ-R) Scale

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carrie Allison ◽  
Simon Baron-Cohen ◽  
Mark H Stone ◽  
Steven J Muncer
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Rasch Model ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Rasch Modeling ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Scale Scores ◽  
Spectrum Condition ◽  
The Rasch Model

AbstractThis study assessed the dimensionality of the Systemizing Quotient-Revised (SQ-R), a measure of how strong a person's interest is in systems, using two statistical approaches: Rasch modeling and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Participants included N = 675 with an autism spectrum condition (ASC), N = 1369 family members of people with ASC, and N = 2014 typical controls. Data were applied to the Rasch model (Rating Scale) using WINSTEPS. The data fit the Rasch model quite well lending support to the idea that systemizing could be seen as unidimensional. Reliability estimates were .99 for items and .92 for persons. A CFA parceling approach confirmed that a unidimensional model fit the data. There was, however, differential functioning by sex in some of these items. An abbreviated 44-item version of the scale, consisting of items without differential item functioning by sex was developed. This shorter scale also was tested from a Rasch perspective and confirmed through CFA. All measures showed differences on total scale scores between those participants with and without ASC (d = 0.71, p < .005), and between sexes (d = 0.53, p < .005). We conclude that the SQ-R is an appropriate measure of systemizing which can be measured along a single dimension.

Measuring the Meaning of Miscarriage: Revision of the Impact of Miscarriage Scale

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn S. Huffman ◽  
Kristen Swanson ◽  
Mary R. Lynn
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Exploratory Factor Analysis ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Phenomenological Study ◽  
Original Structure ◽  
Factor Solution ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
The Impact

Background and Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine a factor structure for the Impact of Miscarriage Scale (IMS). The 24 items comprising the IMS were originally derived from a phenomenological study of miscarriage in women. Initial psychometric properties were established based on a sample of 188 women (Swanson, 1999a). Method: Data from 341 couples were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Results: CFA did not confirm the original structure. EFA explained 57% of the variance through an 18-item, 4-factor structure: isolation and guilt, loss of baby, devastating event, and adjustment. Except for the Adjustment subscale, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were ≥.78. Conclusion: Although a 3-factor solution is most defensible, with further refinement and additional items, the 4th factor (adjustment) may warrant retention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document