scholarly journals Factor Structure of the Sussex-Oxford Compassion Scales

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 489-508
Author(s):  
Júlia Halamová ◽  
Martin Kanovský
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Self Compassion ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
Valid Instrument ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
The One ◽  
Definition Of

Without a reliable and valid instrument of compassion and self-compassion, it is hard to conduct quality research in compassion even though it is a rapidly growing area of interest in many scientific fields. However, recently the Sussex-Oxford Compassion Scales (SOCS; Gu et al., 2020) were developed, with two parallel versions for compassion (SCOS-O) and self-compassion (SCOS-S) containing 20 items each. Because the SOCS scales are newly developed measures of compassion, this is the first study to be conducted beyond the original research (Gu et al., 2020) that validates their factor structure. Our sample consisted of 1080 respondents; 19.35% were males and 80.65% were females. Mean age was 29.29 (SD = 11.15). Convenience sampling via social networks was used. To analyse the data, we reproduced all the confirmatory models in Gu et al. (2020) for both scales: the one-factor model, five-factor model, and five-factor hierarchical model. Our research results showed that for the SCOS-O, the multidimensional definition of compassion for others fits the factor structure of the scale, but this does not apply to the SCOS-S. Self-compassion has two dominant factors over and above five specific factors: Rational Compassion (containing two specific factors: Recognising Suffering and Understanding the Universality of Suffering) and Emotional/Behavioural Compassion (containing three specific factors: Feeling for the Person Suffering, Tolerating Uncomfortable Feelings, and Acting or Being Motivated to Act to Alleviate Suffering). Therefore, the total self-compassion score is unsuitable for use because the scale lacks essential unidimensionality; however, the compassion for others total score can be used safely.

scholarly journals Psychometric Properties and Factor Structure of the Brief Religious Coping Scale (Brief-RCOPE) in Puerto Rican Adults

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 48-62
Author(s):  
Orlando M. Pagán-Torres ◽  
Eduardo Cumba-Avilés ◽  
Ernesto Rosario-Hernández ◽  
Juan Aníbal González-Rivera
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Puerto Rican ◽  
Religious Coping ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
Valid Instrument ◽  
Coping Scale ◽  
The One

This research examines the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Brief Religious Coping Scale (Brief-RCOPE) in a sample of 302 Puerto Rican adults. We examined its internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), McDonald’s omega coefficient, construct validity, and factor structure. The Brief-RCOPE obtained an alpha coefficient of .94 in the Positive Religious Coping (PRC) subscale and .84 in the Negative Religious Coping (NRC) subscale. The omega coefficient was .94 (PRC) and .85 (NRC), respectively. We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis, using the Satorra-Bentler correction, to examine the factor structure of the Brief-RCOPE. The two-factor model showed a better adjustment to the data than the one-factor model. Indicators of construct validity were also adequate. Our findings suggest that the Brief-RCOPE is a reliable and valid instrument to measure religious coping strategies that may significantly affect people’s daily lives.

Old Wine in New Bottles? The Case of Self–Compassion and Neuroticism

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Kandler ◽  
Stefan Pfattheicher ◽  
Mattis Geiger ◽  
Johanna Hartung ◽  
Selina Weiss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Satisfaction ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Self Compassion ◽  
Negative Factor ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Compassion Scale ◽  
Positive Factor

Research on self–compassion, which is defined as being understanding and kind to oneself when confronted with negative experiences, has produced an impressive number of articles in recent years. This research shows that individual differences in self–compassion, as measured by the Self–Compassion Scale (SCS), are positively related to life satisfaction, health and social functioning. However, a critical and systematic test of self–compassion from a personality perspective has not yet conducted so far. In the present study ( N = 576), we (i) tested the factor structure of the SCS, (ii) examined the distinctiveness of self–compassion with regard to the five–factor model of personality, focusing on neuroticism, and (iii) tested the incremental predictive power of self–compassion beyond the five–factor model in the context of life satisfaction. Confirmatory factor analyses supported a two–factor plus six facets solution of self–compassion (a positive factor and a negative factor). Additional analyses revealed that the negative factor was redundant with facets of neuroticism ( rs ≥ .85), whereas the positive factor had some unique variance left. However, neither the negative factor nor the positive factor could explain substantial incremental variance in life satisfaction beyond neuroticism. Recommendations for how to use the SCS are provided, and the future of research on self–compassion is discussed. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology

Personality Assessment

2016 ◽  
pp. 134-146
Author(s):  
Dragos Iliescu ◽  
Dan Ispas
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Assessment Inventory ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
International Context ◽  
Two Measures ◽  
The Cross ◽  
Definition Of

The chapter focuses on the assessment of personality in an international context. Starting from the definition of personality, the chapter discusses the way culture and personality are mixed and sets then out to explain the emic (indigenous) versus etic (universal) debate in personality assessment. The combined emic-etic approach is outlined as an interesting evolution in cross-cultural personality assessment, and two measures based on this approach are discussed, the Cross-Cultural Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI) and the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI). Finally, the chapter discusses the currently dominant model of personality used in assessment internationally, the five-factor model, outlining some of the dilemmas still being debated related to this model, such as the broad versus narrow debate, the cross-cultural replicability issue, and the bandwidth-fidelity dilemma.

Cross-Cultural Validation of the Modified Practice Attitudes Scale: Initial Factor Analysis and a New Factor Model

Assessment ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heehoon Park ◽  
Chad K. Ebesutani ◽  
Kyong-Mee Chung ◽  
Cameo Stanick
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Health System ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Mental Health System ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
The One

Objective: The objective of this study was to create the Korean version of the Modified Practice Attitudes Scale (K-MPAS) to measure clinicians’ attitudes toward evidence-based treatments (EBTs) in the Korean mental health system. Method: Using 189 U.S. therapists and 283 members from the Korean mental health system, we examined the reliability and validity of the MPAS scores. We also conducted the first exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis on the MPAS and compared EBT attitudes across U.S. and Korean therapists. Results: Results revealed that the inclusion of both “reversed-worded” and “non–reversed-worded” items introduced significant method effects that compromised the integrity of the one-factor MPAS model. Problems with the one-factor structure were resolved by eliminating the “non–reversed-worded” items. Reliability and validity were adequate among both Korean and U.S. therapists. Korean therapists also reported significantly more negative attitudes toward EBTs on the MPAS than U.S. therapists. Conclusions: The K-MPAS is the first questionnaire designed to measure Korean service providers’ attitudes toward EBTs to help advance the dissemination of EBTs in Korea. The current study also demonstrated the negative impacts that can be introduced by incorporating oppositely worded items into a scale, particularly with respect to factor structure and detecting significant group differences.

Symptom differentiation of anxiety and depression across youth development and clinic-referred/nonreferred samples: An examination of competing factor structures of the Child Behavior Checklist DSM-oriented scales

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (4pt1) ◽  
pp. 1005-1015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maggi Price ◽  
Charmaine Higa-McMillan ◽  
Chad Ebesutani ◽  
Kelsie Okamura ◽  
Brad J. Nakamura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Child Behavior ◽  
Youth Development ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Child Behavior Checklist ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Depressive Symptomology ◽  
Model Research ◽  
Competing Models

AbstractThis study examined the psychometric properties of the DSM-oriented scales of the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach, Dumenci, & Rescorla, 2003) using confirmatory factor analysis to compare the six-factor structure of the DSM-oriented scales to competing models consistent with developmental theories of symptom differentiation. We tested these models on both clinic-referred (N = 757) and school-based, nonreferred (N = 713) samples of youths in order to assess the generalizability of the factorial structures. Although previous research has supported the fit of the six-factor DSM-oriented structure in a normative sample of youths ages 7 to 18 (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001), tripartite model research indicates that anxiety and depressive symptomology are less differentiated among children compared to adolescents (Jacques & Mash, 2004). We thus examined the relative fit of a six- and a five-factor model (collapsing anxiety and depression) with younger (ages 7–10) and older (ages 11–18) youth subsamples. The results revealed that the six-factor model fit the best in all samples except among younger nonclinical children. The results extended the generalizability of the rationally derived six-factor structure of the DSM-oriented scales to clinic-referred youths and provided further support to the notion that younger children in nonclinical samples exhibit less differentiated symptoms of anxiety and depression.

Factor Structure of the New Environmental Paradigm Scale: Evidence from an Urban Sample in Southern California

2004 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang-Ho C. Ji
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Southern California ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Factor Models ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Urban Sample ◽  
Original Scale ◽  
The One ◽  
Three Factor ◽  
New Environmental Paradigm

This study examined the factor structure of the New Environmental Paradigm Scale using responses from 261 urban subjects from southern California. The analysis yielded findings inconsistent with many previous studies of the original scale. This study supported an 8-item two-factor model of the scale rather than the one-factor and three-factor models proposed earlier. A subsequent validation study provides evidence for this short form's validity, as the two factors were predictive of commitment to preservation of nature.

scholarly journals Exploring the Structure of Narcissism: Towards an Integrated Solution

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael L Crowe ◽  
Donald Lynam ◽  
William Keith Campbell ◽  
Josh Miller
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Externalizing Behavior ◽  
Precise Measurement ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Parsimonious Model ◽  
Amazon's Mechanical Turk ◽  
Criterion Variables ◽  
Three Factor

Objective: Despite decades of work on narcissism there remain many active areas of exploration and debate including a clear and consensual description of its underlying components. Understanding narcissism’s factor structure is necessary for precise measurement and investigation of specific psychological and behavioral processes. The aim of the current study was to explore the structure of narcissism by examining it at varying hierarchical levels. Method: Participants recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (N = 591) completed 303 narcissism items encompassing 46 narcissism scales and subscales. Criterion variables measuring the Five Factor Model, self-esteem, aggression, and externalizing behavior were also collected. Results: A series of factor analyses reveal the factor structure of narcissism at a range of specificities. No more than five meaningful factors (i.e., Grandiosity, Neuroticism, Antagonism, Distrustful Self-reliance, Attention-seeking) were identified and the most parsimonious model appears to be a three-factor structure. Narcissism scales that effectively capture each of the identified factors are identified. Factors diverged in their associations with criterion variables. Conclusions: A three-factor model (i.e., Agentic Extraversion, Narcissistic Neuroticism, Self-centered Antagonism) seems to be the most parsimonious conceptualization. Larger factor solutions are discussed, but future research will be necessary to determine the value of these increasingly narrow factors.

scholarly journals Measuring Failures Proneness: Scale Development and Preliminary Validations

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene Diamant ◽  
Zohar Rusou
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Deviant Behaviors ◽  
Initial Stage ◽  
One Step ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Preliminary Phase

Behavioral failures can serve as precursors for accidents. Yet, individual differences in the predisposition to behavioral failures have predominantly been investigated within relatively narrow parameters, with the focus limited to subsets of behaviors or specific domains. A broader perspective might prove useful in illuminating correlations between various forms of accidents. The current research was undertaken as one step toward developing the concept of behavioral failures proneness in its multidimensional aspect. We report the initial stage of the development and validation of the Failures Proneness questionnaire (FP): a brief, multifaceted, self-report scale of common behavioral failures in everyday settings. In a preliminary phase we conceived an extensive pool of prospective items. Study 1 identified and validated the factor-structure of FP and reduced the scale to a brief measure of 16 items. Study 2 corroborated the factor structure of the FP and evaluated its construct validity by assessing its relationship with the Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality traits. Study 3 tested the criterion-related validity of the FP by assessing its ability to predict deviant behaviors. These studies provide evidence of the FP’s performance in generating valuable information on a broad range of behavioral antecedents of accidents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document