scholarly journals DEVELOPMENT AND PSYCHOMETRIC TESTING OF KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDE, AND PRACTICE ON COVID-19 OUTBREAK QUESTIONNAIRE (KAPCovQ) FOR GENERAL COMMUNITY

2021 ◽  
pp. 100-105
Author(s):  
HIDAYAH KARUNIAWATI ◽  
TRI YULIANTI ◽  
LISTIANA MASYITA DEWI ◽  
WIDYANA ATMA MAULIDA ◽  
NUR LAELA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Scale Development ◽  
P Value ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Scale Evaluation ◽  
Item Development ◽  
Attitude And Practice ◽  
Acceptable Range ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
General Community

Objective: To develop a valid and reliable questionnaire about knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards Covid-19 (KAPCovQ) in the general community based on psychometric properties. Methods: This study consisted of item development, scale development, and scale evaluation. Item development was based on literature review and content validity by experts. Scale development was conducted by pre-testing ten respondents. Scale evaluation was assessed using 375 respondents. Scale evaluation included construct validity with exploratory factor analysis (EFA) followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and reliability test with Cronbach’s α, composite reliability, and test-retest reliability. Results: The final KAPCovQ consisted of 3 domains with 31 items. Twelve items of the knowledge domain met the acceptable range for item analysis. Three factors of attitude domain and one factor of practice domain showed that 59.13% and 57.97% of the total variance respectively were identified in EFA. The result of the CFA for both attitude and practices domain indicated acceptable fit indices for the proposed model. The CFA model fit indices of attitude domain were χ2/df 2.05, p-value 0.01, GFI 0.92, RMSEA 0.07, TLI 0.90, CFI 0.92, and PNFI 0.64 and practices domain were χ2/df 1.18, p-value 0.28, GFI 0.98, RMSEA 0.03, TLI 0.98, CFI 0.99, and PNFI 0.54. Knowledge and all factors in the attitude and practice domain had an acceptable range in internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability. Conclusion: The finding of this study demonstrated that KAPCovQ is valid and reliable for measuring the KAP on Covid-19 in the general community.

scholarly journals Development and validation of a knowledge, attitude, and practice questionnaire regarding cardiovascular diseases in an Iranian general population

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Koohi ◽  
Parisa Amiri ◽  
Yadollah Mehrabi ◽  
Mehrdad Karimi ◽  
Davood Khalili
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Cardiovascular Diseases ◽  
General Population ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Attitude And Practice ◽  
Knowledge Attitude And Practice

Abstract Background Studies on knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) can be valuable for public health to help to develop targeted educational programs and assess the effectiveness of intervention programs. The purpose of this study was to develop and examine the validity and reliability of a questionnaire on knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) regarding cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), their risk factors, and symptoms among an Iranian general population. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted on an Iranian population older than 20 years referred to some of Tehran’s healthcare centers. An initial 62-item questionnaire was developed, and the face, content, and construct validities were assessed. Results In all, 300 adults with a mean age (SD) of 39.79 (12.1) years participated in this study. Based on the results of the content validity, a questionnaire with 30 essential items was designed. Exploratory factor analysis suggested a four-factor subscale with 29 finalized items (CVD-KAP29), and acceptable goodness of fit indices was demonstrated by confirmatory factor analysis. The Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s ω coefficients were higher than 0.60 for all domains except the nutrition and smoking subscales. Conclusions Results provided evidence of the validity of the CVD-KAP29 for KAP studies for cardiovascular diseases in the general population.

scholarly journals The Poor Fit of Model Fit for Selecting Number of Factors in Exploratory Factor Analysis for Scale Evaluation

2020 ◽  
pp. 001316442094289
Author(s):  
Amanda K. Montoya ◽  
Michael C. Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Root Mean Square ◽  
Exploratory Factor Analysis ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Mean Square ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Scale Evaluation ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Model Fit Indices ◽  
The Impact

Model fit indices are being increasingly recommended and used to select the number of factors in an exploratory factor analysis. Growing evidence suggests that the recommended cutoff values for common model fit indices are not appropriate for use in an exploratory factor analysis context. A particularly prominent problem in scale evaluation is the ubiquity of correlated residuals and imperfect model specification. Our research focuses on a scale evaluation context and the performance of four standard model fit indices: root mean square error of approximate (RMSEA), standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), comparative fit index (CFI), and Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), and two equivalence test-based model fit indices: RMSEAt and CFIt. We use Monte Carlo simulation to generate and analyze data based on a substantive example using the positive and negative affective schedule ( N = 1,000). We systematically vary the number and magnitude of correlated residuals as well as nonspecific misspecification, to evaluate the impact on model fit indices in fitting a two-factor exploratory factor analysis. Our results show that all fit indices, except SRMR, are overly sensitive to correlated residuals and nonspecific error, resulting in solutions that are overfactored. SRMR performed well, consistently selecting the correct number of factors; however, previous research suggests it does not perform well with categorical data. In general, we do not recommend using model fit indices to select number of factors in a scale evaluation framework.

The poor fit of model fit for selecting number of factors in exploratory factor analysis for scale evaluation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Kay Montoya ◽  
Michael C. Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Exploratory Factor Analysis ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Model Specification ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Scale Evaluation ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Model Fit Indices ◽  
The Impact

Model fit indices are being increasingly recommended and used to select the number of factors in an exploratory factor analysis. Growing evidence suggests that the recommended cutoff values for common model fit indices are not appropriate for use in an exploratory factor analysis context. A particularly prominent problem in scale evaluation is the ubiquity of correlated residuals and imperfect model specification. Our research focuses on a scale evaluation context and the performance of four standard model fit indices: root mean squared error of approximate (RMSEA), standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR), comparative fit index (CFI), and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and two equivalence test-based model fit indices: RMSEAt and CFIt. We use Monte Carlo simulation to generate and analyze data based on a substantive example using the positive and negative affective schedule (N = 1000). We systematically vary the number and magnitude of correlated residuals as well as nonspecific misspecification, to evaluate the impact on model fit indices in fitting a two-factor EFA. Our results show that all fit indices, except SRMR, are overly sensitive to correlated residuals and nonspecific error, resulting in solutions which are over-factored. SRMR performed well, consistently selecting the correct number of factors; however, previous research suggests it does not perform well with categorical data. In general, we do not recommend using model fit indices to select number of factors in a scale evaluation framework.

scholarly journals Reliability and validity study of the Thai adaptation of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (CBI-SS) among preclinical medical students at the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Thailand

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e0261887
Author(s):  
Wasit Wongtrakul ◽  
Yodying Dangprapai ◽  
Nattha Saisavoey ◽  
Naratip Sa-nguanpanich
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Burnout Syndrome ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Student Survey ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Siriraj Hospital ◽  
Preclinical Medical Students ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Burnout syndrome is a syndrome of emotional exhaustion, professional efficacy and cynicism. A significant proportion of medical students reported having burnout syndrome during their training in medical education. Several tools including the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (CBI-SS) are considered to be a valid measurement of burnout syndrome in medical students. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the CBI-SS for assessing burnout syndrome among preclinical medical students in Thailand. This study was conducted during February to March 2019 at the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University (Bangkok, Thailand), which is Thailand’s largest and oldest medical school, and Thailand’s largest national tertiary referral center. After receiving formal permission to do so from the copyright owner, the original English language version of the CBI-SS was translated to Thai language using an internationally recommended and accepted forward-backward translation protocol. The Thai version of the CBI-SS (Thai CBI-SS) comprises 25 items, including 6 items for personal burnout, 7 items for study-related burnout, 6 items for colleague-related burnout, and 6 items for teacher-related burnout. Standardized Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated to evaluate internal consistency reliability, and correlation coefficient was computed to determine test-retest reliability. A total of 414 preclinical medical students participated in this study. Due to sub-optimal factor weights (<0.50), items 6, 10 and 17 were excluded. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of the 22-item Thai CBI-SS for personal, study-related, colleague-related, and teacher-related burnout were 0.898, 0.896, 0.910 and 0.900 respectively. The correlation coefficients for test-retest reliability after three weeks were 0.820, 0.870, 0.821, and 0.787 for personal, study-related, colleague-related, and teacher-related burnout, respectively. Maximum likelihood analysis with oblimin rotation indicated four main components, and confirmatory factor analysis revealed good fit indices of the Thai CBI-SS. Confirmatory factor analysis showed good fit indices of CBI-SS domains (χ2/df = 2.39; CFI = 0.957; GFI = 0.909; RMSEA = 0.058; TLI = 0.949; and NFI = 0.928). The convergent validity analysis using the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and the Composite Reliability (CR) was adequate for all dimensions (personal: AVE = 0.626, CR = 0.893; study-related: AVE = 0.601, CR = 0.899; colleague-related: AVE = 0.677, CR = 0.913; teacher-related: AVE = 0.606, CR = 0.900). The HTMT values for all variables are in the range from 0.315 to 0.833, confirming the discriminant validity. The Thai CBI-SS was found to be a valid and reliable tool for evaluating burnout syndrome in preclinical medical students in Thailand.

scholarly journals Construction of Moral Disengagement Scale for Adults: A Reliable Measure

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-223
Author(s):  
Ayesha Saif ◽  
Saima Riaz
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Moral Disengagement ◽  
Item Analysis ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Indigenous Research ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Model Fit Indices ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Age Range

The main objective of current research was development of an indigenous Moral Disengagement Scale for Adults (MDS-A) in Urdu language. The subsequent objective was the establishment of reliability of newly developed Scale. Initially an item pool of 116 items was formulated based on Bandura’s model (2002) which was reduced to 106 items and later 92 items after expert’s evaluation and item analysis, respectively. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted on 92 items scale by administering it on 579 adults (250 men and 329 women), age range of 19-83 years from villages and various educational institutes of district Gujrat, Pakistan. EFA by using Principal Component Analysis with Varimax Orthogonal Rotation resulted in six factor solution of 63 items. Later Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) confirmed the six-factor structure on an independent sample of 413 adults (193 men and 220 women) with age range 19-80 years from Gujrat district, Pakistan. After deletion of 43 items, CFA yielded good model fit indices for final 20 items MDS-A. MDS-A had very satisfactory Cronbach’s alpha reliability and test-retest reliability. MDS-A also demonstrated construct validity in terms of highly significant item-total correlations and subscale-to-scale total correlations. Overall, a reliable and valid scale for measurement of moral disengagement among adults in Pakistani culture is available for further indigenous research and counselling settings.

Toward Understanding and Measuring Grandiose and Vulnerable Narcissism Within Trait Personality Models

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate L. Derry ◽  
Jeneva L. Ohan ◽  
Donna M. Bayliss
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
The Self ◽  
Underlying Structure ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Vulnerable Narcissism ◽  
Considerable Confusion ◽  
Personality Models ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Item Scale

Abstract. Research on trait narcissism is hindered by considerable confusion over its underlying structure, especially differences between pathological and normal narcissism, and grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. To address this problem, we describe two studies that examined the factor structure of a broad range of narcissism items and the implications for current narcissism theory. In Study 1, 881 undergraduates completed a scale composed of items taken trans-theoretically from narcissism scales that targeted grandiose, vulnerable, and normal narcissism descriptions. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted and construct validity was established. In Study 2, 298 community-based participants were surveyed. Fit indices of a reduced 20-item scale and test-retest reliability were examined. Both studies supported a hierarchical structure of distinct grandiose and vulnerable factors, each with interpersonal and intrapersonal components. Thus, trait narcissism seems best described by grandiose and vulnerable dimensions, each of which can be focused toward the self or others.

Comparison of Unitary and Multidimensional Models of the Whiteley Index in a Nonclinical Sample: Implications for Understanding and Assessing Health Anxiety

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 87-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon J. R. Asmundson ◽  
Nicholas R. Carleton ◽  
Candice V. Bovell ◽  
Steven Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Health Anxiety ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Item Content ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Health anxiety is an important but poorly assessed phenomenon. Manifesting along a continuum, health anxiety is the result of a catastrophic appraisal of somatic sensations and changes as indicative of disease. The Whiteley Index (WI) is one of the most widely used self-report measures for assessing health anxiety both for research and for clinical practice. It generally exhibits excellent and robust psychometric properties for internal consistency, test–retest reliability, convergent validity, and concurrent validity; however, both its item content and its factor structure are matters of debate. Moreover, the measure has rarely been assessed in nonclinical samples. For the present study, a sample of 300 participants from the University of Regina completed the WI. If the latent dimensions identified in factor analysis represent etiologic mechanisms, then the elucidation of the WI’s factor structure may enhance our understanding of health anxiety. Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine a robust and reliable item content and factor structure, resulting in a six-item two-factor structure that was invariant across gender. The two factors were denoted Somatic Symptoms/Bodily Preoccupation and Disease Worry/Phobia. Previous factor structure solutions were compared to the factor structure derived from this study by means of confirmatory factor analysis. The newly established item content and factor structure resulted in acceptable fit indices that were statistically superior to those found using the previous factor structure solutions. Implications and directions for assessment of health anxiety and future research are discussed.

scholarly journals Development and Validation of the Nursing Students’ Rights Awareness Scale in Clinical Practice: A Scale Development Study

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 1323
Author(s):  
Sung-Hee Park ◽  
Mi-Young Choi
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Nursing Students ◽  
Scale Development ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Concept Analysis ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Scale Evaluation ◽  
Item Development ◽  
Evaluation Stage

Nursing students perform clinical training in a variety of clinical practice fields, so their rights are important. Efforts are needed to accurately identify and measure the awareness of nursing students’ rights. This study aimed to develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of nursing students’ rights awareness scale. The study procedure was carried out in four stages: the concept analysis, item development, scale development, and scale evaluation stage. First, in the concept analysis stage, the attributes of the concept were derived. Second, in the item development stage, preliminary items were derived, and the content validity was verified. Third, in the scale development stage, a preliminary and main survey were conducted, and item reduction was implemented. Fourth, in the scale evaluation stage, construct validity and reliability were verified. The collected data were analyzed using the SPSS 24.0, and item analysis was conducted using skewness, kurtosis, and item-total correlation scores. The construct validity was assessed by exploratory factor analysis, convergent validity, and divergent validity. The reliability was analyzed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and composite reliability. The final version of the scale was tested on 240 nursing students from three cities in South Korea. From the construct validity, three factors and 14 items were selected. The factors included “the rights to be protected, cared for, supported, and respected” (eight items), “the rights to be recognized as a member of a nursing team” (three items), and “the rights to learn” (three questions). The reliability of the scale was also verified. Through this study, the scale was developed to identify the rights of nursing students in clinical practice. The implication of this study is that it has laid the foundation for measuring the rights of nursing students applicable in clinical settings for the first time. The limitation of this study is that data were collected in some regions. Therefore, it is necessary to verify the validity and reliability of the scale in various cultures.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Long and Short Forms of the Worry Domains Questionnaire

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 239-243
Author(s):  
Roberto Nuevo ◽  
Andrés Losada ◽  
María Márquez-González ◽  
Cecilia Peñacoba
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Factorial Validity ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Short Forms ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Positive Correlations ◽  
Future Work

The Worry Domains Questionnaire was proposed as a measure of both pathological and nonpathological worry, and assesses the frequency of worrying about five different domains: relationships, lack of confidence, aimless future, work, and financial. The present study analyzed the factor structure of the long and short forms of the WDQ (WDQ and WDQ-SF, respectively) through confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 262 students (M age = 21.8; SD = 2.6; 86.3% females). While the goodness-of-fit indices did not provide support for the WDQ, good fit indices were found for the WDQ-SF. Furthermore, no source of misspecification was identified, thus, supporting the factorial validity of the WDQ-SF scale. Significant positive correlations between the WDQ-SF and its subscales with worry (PSWQ), anxiety (STAI-T), and depression (BDI) were found. The internal consistency was good for the total scale and for the subscales. This work provides support for the use of the WDQ-SF, and potential uses for research and clinical purposes are discussed.

A Cautionary Note on Incremental Fit Indices Reported by LISREL

Methodology ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan C. Schmukle ◽  
Jochen Hardt
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Maximum Likelihood ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Structural Equation Models ◽  
Null Model ◽  
Likelihood Estimation ◽  
Parameter Estimates ◽  
Fit Indices ◽  
Cautionary Note ◽  
Confirmatory Factor

Abstract. Incremental fit indices (IFIs) are regularly used when assessing the fit of structural equation models. IFIs are based on the comparison of the fit of a target model with that of a null model. For maximum-likelihood estimation, IFIs are usually computed by using the χ2 statistics of the maximum-likelihood fitting function (ML-χ2). However, LISREL recently changed the computation of IFIs. Since version 8.52, IFIs reported by LISREL are based on the χ2 statistics of the reweighted least squares fitting function (RLS-χ2). Although both functions lead to the same maximum-likelihood parameter estimates, the two χ2 statistics reach different values. Because these differences are especially large for null models, IFIs are affected in particular. Consequently, RLS-χ2 based IFIs in combination with conventional cut-off values explored for ML-χ2 based IFIs may lead to a wrong acceptance of models. We demonstrate this point by a confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 2449 subjects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document