Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Scale Reliability (scale + reliability)
Selected AbstractsHumour styles, personality, and well-being among Lebanese university studentsEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY, Issue 3 2004Shahe S. Kazarian This research examined the structure and correlates of the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ) in Lebanese university students. Four humour factors were found, as in the original Canadian samples: Affiliative, Self-Enhancing, Aggressive, and Self-Defeating humour. Scale reliabilities were generally acceptable, and inter-correlations among the scales were low. Lebanese participants scored lower than Canadians on Affiliative and Self-Enhancing humour and lower than Belgians on Affiliative and Aggressive humour. As in Canadian and Belgian samples, males reported significantly more use of Aggressive and Self-Defeating humour than did females. Humour styles correlated differentially, and generally as predicted, with horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism, attachment styles, perceived health, and psychological well-being. Overall, the findings support the cross-cultural stability of the HSQ as well as the differential relationship of these humour styles with culture-related personality traits and psychological well-being. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] The construct validity of three entry level personality inventories used in the UK: cautionary findings from a multiple-inventory investigation,EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY, Issue S1 2003Neil Anderson This paper reports psychometric analyses into the convergent and divergent validity of three popular entry-level measures of occupational personality in the UK and Continental Europe. A sample of 504 individuals completed all three measures: the British version of the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), the Occupational Personality Questionnaire (OPQ Version FS5.2), and the Business Personality Indicator (BPI). In addition, independent ratings of the conceptual loading of primary source scales onto the Five Factor Model (FFM) were obtained (n,=,66). Data were used in a three-stage analytical procedure directed at examining psychometric and construct validity. Results are reported for descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, Cohen's d), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alphas), and exploratory factor analyses. Findings into the construct validity of first-order scales (i.e. primary source scales) and second-order scales (i.e. FFM loadings) are presented in detail, including multitrait,multimethod (MTMM) analyses of convergent and divergent validity. For some scales, the observed variability in our sample suggested significant range restriction/enhancement. It was found that scale reliabilities were generally lower than those typically reported by the test publishers, and that published factor structures for these measures could not be replicated by the authors for this sample of individuals. Further independent construct validity research into occupational personality inventories is encouraged based upon our proposed model of single-, dual-, and multiple-inventory construct validation studies. Practically, our findings suggest that when IWO psychologists or personnel professionals aim to select/screen job applicants for a particular personality trait those who are selected may vary depending on (i) which personality inventory is used, (ii) the actual variability in the applicant sample tested, and (iii) reliability of the scales under consideration. As such, this study sounds a note of caution. Future research is called for to replicate these findings. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Developing and validating a tool to measure parenting self-efficacyJOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, Issue 2 2005Sally Kendall BSc PHD RGN RHV Aims., This paper reports the development of a tool to measure parenting self-efficacy as an aid to evaluating parenting programmes. Background., Whilst there has been increasing interest in parenting programmes from parents, government and professionals, there is a lack of rigorous evaluation studies of their effectiveness, particularly their longer-term outcomes. Equally, there is little research evidence of the views and experiences of parents themselves. It is important to develop robust outcome measures which draw on well-developed theoretical constructs to measure parents' perceived abilities to manage their children based on their own views and experiences. Self-efficacy, a self-perception of one's ability to perform competently and effectively in a particular task or setting, may provide such a framework. Methods., Data from 12 focus groups conducted with parents and parenting programme facilitators informed the development of the tool. A thematic analysis of the focus group transcripts identified key items to be included in the self-efficacy instrument, and these were developed into 82 Likert-format statements. A multi-method approach was used to test the instrument for validity and reliability. Findings., Nine domain specific sub-scales of parenting were identified from the analysis of the focus group data. Internal reliability coefficients for the subscales ranged from 0·80 to 0·89, and the overall scale reliability was 0·94. External reliability coefficients ranged from rs = 0·58 (n = 19, P < 0·01) to rs = 0·88 (n = 19, P < 0·01). Conclusion., A valid and reliable tool to measure parenting self-efficacy has been developed, which will aid evaluation of parenting programmes. [source] A family of measures to evaluate scale reliability in a longitudinal settingJOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY: SERIES A (STATISTICS IN SOCIETY), Issue 1 2009Annouschka Laenen Summary., The concept of reliability denotes one of the most important psychometric properties of a measurement scale. Reliability refers to the capacity of the scale to discriminate between subjects in a given population. In classical test theory, it is often estimated by using the intraclass correlation coefficient based on two replicate measurements. However, the modelling framework that is used in this theory is often too narrow when applied in practical situations. Generalizability theory has extended reliability theory to a much broader framework but is confronted with some limitations when applied in a longitudinal setting. We explore how the definition of reliability can be generalized to a setting where subjects are measured repeatedly over time. On the basis of four defining properties for the concept of reliability, we propose a family of reliability measures which circumscribes the area in which reliability measures should be sought. It is shown how different members assess different aspects of the problem and that the reliability of the instrument can depend on the way that it is used. The methodology is motivated by and illustrated on data from a clinical study on schizophrenia. On the basis of this study, we estimate and compare the reliabilities of two different rating scales to evaluate the severity of the disorder. [source] Suspicious minds: The motive to acquire relationship-threatening informationPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, Issue 2 2003William Ickes In four studies, we obtained evidence for the reliability and validity of a 21-item scale designed to measure a new theoretical construct: individual differences in the motivation to acquire relationship-threatening information (hereafter, MARTI). Study 1 provided evidence for the MARTI scale's reliability and discriminant validity, revealing that it was reliable and not significantly correlated with measures of the Big Five personality traits, adult attachment styles, or more general social orientations. Studies 2 and 3 provided evidence for the scale's convergent and discriminant validity, showing that dating partners with higher MARTI scores (i.e., those who were more motivated to acquire relationship-threatening information) scored lower in relational trust and reported engaging in more "suspicion behaviors." Study 4 provided behavioral evidence for the scale's predictive validity, revealing that (a) dating partners with higher MARTI scores were more likely to break up within 5 months, and (b) the breakup rate was most pronounced for dating partners who scored higher on the scale and who also reported being less close. We discuss how this new construct and measure can be used to study important relationship dynamics. We can't go on together With suspicious minds. - Lines from the 1969 Elvis Presley hit [source] | ||||||||||