Structural validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition: Confirmatory factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests.

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 458-472 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary L. Canivez ◽  
Marley W. Watkins ◽  
Stefan C. Dombrowski
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Structural Validity ◽  
Intelligence Scale ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Confirmatory Factor

scholarly journals Examining Boyhood Masculinity Within an Irish Context: An Assessment of the Reliability and Structural Validity of the Meanings of Adolescent Masculinity Scale and the Adolescent Masculinity Ideology in Relationships Scale

SAGE Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 215824402110231
Author(s):  
Joshua W. Katz ◽  
Todd G. Morrison ◽  
Cormac Ó Beaglaoich
Keyword(s):  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Adolescent Boys ◽  
Structural Validity ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Cultural Variations ◽  
Masculinity Ideology ◽  
Irish Context ◽  
Confirmatory Factor

The Meanings of Adolescent Masculinity Scale (MAMS) and the Adolescent Masculinity Ideology in Relationships Scale (AMIRS) were designed by American researchers to assess masculinity in adolescent boys. Given that masculinities differ cross-culturally, though, these scales may not be viable for use with non-American populations. In the current study, 221 Irish adolescents completed the MAMS and the AMIRS. Using confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs), the MAMS’s and the AMIRS’s factor structures were tested. Results indicated poor goodness-of-fit in both cases. Attempts to improve the models were unsuccessful. Accordingly, neither the MAMS nor the AMIRS appear to be structurally valid within an Irish context. We recommend that researchers consider cultural variations when designing, validating, and utilizing indicators of masculinity.

Construct Validity of the German Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition: Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses of the 15 Primary and Secondary Subtests

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112093633
Author(s):  
Gary L. Canivez ◽  
Silvia Grieder ◽  
Anette Buenger
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
The United States ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Intelligence Scale ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Technical Manual ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
Exploratory Factor Analyses

The latent factor structure of the German Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth edition (German WISC-V) was examined using complementary hierarchical exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) with Schmid and Leiman transformation and confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) for all reported models from the German WISC-V Technical Manual and rival bifactor models using the standardization sample ( N = 1,087) correlation matrix of the 15 primary and secondary subtests. EFA results did not support a fifth factor (Fluid Reasoning). A four-factor model with the dominant general intelligence ( g) factor resembling the WISC-IV was supported by EFA. CFA results indicated the best representation was a bifactor model with four group factors, complementing EFA results. Present EFA and CFA results replicated other independent assessments of standardization and clinical samples of the United States and international versions of the WISC-V and indicated primary, if not exclusive, interpretation of the Full Scale IQ as an estimate of g.

scholarly journals Structural Validity of the Dutch Version of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE-NL) in Patients With Hand and Wrist Injuries

2016 ◽  
Vol 96 (6) ◽  
pp. 908-916 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mostafa El Moumni ◽  
Merit E. Van Eck ◽  
Klaus W. Wendt ◽  
Inge H.F. Reininga ◽  
Lidwine Brigitta Mokkink
Keyword(s):  
Wrist Injuries ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Patient Report Outcome ◽  
Dutch Version ◽  
Structural Validity ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Patient Report Outcome Measure ◽  
Adequate Model ◽  
Confirmatory Factor

Background Hand and wrist injuries are one of the most common injuries seen in adults. The Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) questionnaire has been developed as a patient-report outcome measure of pain and disability to evaluate the outcome after hand and wrist injuries. Objective The aims of this study were (1) to evaluate the structural validity of the existing Dutch version of the PRWE (PRWE-NL) in patients with hand or wrist injuries and (2) to investigate the appropriateness of reporting subscale scores. Design This was a retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data of 368 adult patients. Methods Patients aged 18 to 65 years and treated either surgically or conservatively for an isolated hand or wrist injury were recruited. Patients were excluded if they were unable to speak or read Dutch. Confirmatory factor analyses were used to investigate structural validity, and Cronbach alpha (α) and omega (ω) coefficients were used to investigate internal consistency. Results A series of confirmatory factor analyses revealed that all models (ie, a single-factor model, correlated 2- and 3-factor models, and 2 bifactor models) were associated with adequate model fit. However, inspection of the factor loadings, the explained common variance (ECV), and the different coefficient omega values revealed that the PRWE-NL should be considered a measure of a unidimensional trait. In addition, PRWE-NL subscales were associated with unacceptably low levels of reliability independently of the global PRWE-NL factor. Limitations Although the sample size was adequate, the response rate was 37.1%. Participants were mainly patients with fractures of the wrist or hand, predominantly treated nonsurgically. Conclusion This study suggests that the PRWE-NL measures a unidimensional trait. A single score should be used for the PRWE-NL, without subscale scores.

Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS)

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Iliceto ◽  
Emanuele Fino
Keyword(s):  
Second Order ◽  
Personality Questionnaire ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Factor Solution ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Beck Hopelessness Scale ◽  
Order Factor ◽  
Model Invariance ◽  
Three Factor

The Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS) is an instrument for assessing cognitive thoughts among suicidal persons. Previous studies have identified different factor structures of the BHS. However, results were not conclusive. The aim of this study was to test the factor structure of the BHS in a sample of Italian individuals (N = 509) from the community, and secondarily to investigate correlations between the BHS, depression (Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition), and personality traits (Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire). Following recommendations of previous investigations, we utilized a 5-point response format. We applied a second-order Confirmatory Factor Analyses and tested for the model invariance. The results suggest that besides a single second-order factor, a second-order three-factor solution is also reasonable, in line with Beck’s theorization.

Mindfulness or Mindlessness?

2011 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volkmar Höfling ◽  
Helfried Moosbrugger ◽  
Karin Schermelleh-Engel ◽  
Thomas Heidenreich
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Mindful Attention ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Item Wording ◽  
Method Effects

The 15 items of the Mindful Attention and Awareness Scale (MAAS; Brown & Ryan, 2003 ) are negatively worded and assumed to assess mindfulness. However, there are indications of differences between the original MAAS and a version with the positively rephrased MAAS items (“mirror items”). The present study examines whether the mindfulness facet “mindful attention and awareness” (MAA) can be measured with both positively and negatively worded items if we take method effects due to item wording into account. To this end, the 15 negatively worded items of the MAAS and additionally 13 positively rephrased items were assessed (N = 602). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) models with and without regard to method effects were carried out and evaluated by means of model fit. As a result, the positively and negatively worded items should be seen as different methods that influence the construct validity of mindfulness. Furthermore, a modified version of the MAAS (MAAS-Short) with five negatively worded items (taken from the MAAS) and five positively worded items (“mirror items”) was introduced as an alternative to assess MAA. The MAAS-Short appears superior to the original MAAS. The results and the limitations of the present study are discussed.

Measurement Invariance Analysis of the Parental Stress Index

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 771-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Piskernik ◽  
Barbara Supper ◽  
Lieselotte Ahnert
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Parental Stress ◽  
Stress Index ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Structural Invariance ◽  
Parent Domain ◽  
Structural Levels

Abstract. While parenting research continues to compare similarities and differences in mothers’ and fathers’ behaviors based on mean values on the respective dimensions, measurement invariance as a prerequisite for these comparisons has seldom been assured. The present study thus subjected the well-known Parenting Stress Index (PSI), widely used in models of family functioning, to a rigorous measurement invariance analysis based on ( N = 214) Austrian couples with children younger than 3 years of age. We evaluated configural, metric, scalar, and uniqueness invariance on item and subscale levels, and tested for structural invariance of means and variances of the PSI parent and child domain by second-order confirmatory factor analyses. As a result, only measurement differences on the scalar levels affected the factor scores, though negligibly. On the structural levels, no differences were found on the PSI child domain across parents, but on the PSI parent domain, mothers reported more stress.

French Adaptation of the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI)

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinne Catale ◽  
Caroline Lejeune ◽  
Sarah Merbah ◽  
Thierry Meulemans
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Executive Functioning ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Cognitive Measures ◽  
Factor Solution ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Rating Instrument ◽  
Functioning Inventory ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Thorell and Nyberg (2008 ) recently developed the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI), a new rating instrument for executive functioning in day-to-day life which can be divided into four subscales: working memory, planning, inhibition, and regulation. Using an exploratory factor analysis on data from young Swedish children attending kindergarten, Thorell and Nyberg (2008 ) found a two-factor solution that taps working memory and inhibition. In the present study, we explored the psychometric characteristics of the French adaptation of the CHEXI. A group of 95 parents of 5- and 6-year-old children completed the CHEXI, 87 of whom were given clinical inhibition and working memory tasks. Confirmatory factor analyses confirmed the two-factor solution based on inhibition and working memory that was identified in the original study of Swedish children. Supplementary results indicated good internal and test-retest reliability for the entire scale, as well as for the two subscales identified. Correlation analyses showed no relationship between cognitive measures and the CHEXI subscales. Possible clinical applications for the CHEXI scales are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document