scholarly journals Assessing the Reliability and Validity of Television and Game Violence Exposure Measures

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin M. Fikkers ◽  
Jessica Taylor Piotrowski ◽  
Patti M. Valkenburg
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Violence Exposure ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Media Violence ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Television Violence ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Game Violence ◽  
Valid Criterion

This study evaluated whether common self-report measures of television and game violence exposure represent reliable and valid measurement tools. Three self-report measures—direct estimates, user-rated favorites, and agency-rated favorites—were assessed in terms of test-retest reliability, criterion validity (their relationship with coded media diaries), and construct validity (their relationship with aggression and gender). A total of 238 adolescents participated in a two-wave survey and completed two media diaries. For game violence, the three self-report measures were reliable and valid. For television violence, only direct estimates achieved test-retest reliability and construct validity. Criterion validity could not be established for the television violence measures because the media diary was not a valid criterion for television violence. Our findings indicate that both direct estimates and favorites are valid measures for game violence, whereas for television violence, only direct estimates are valid. We conclude with a discussion about ways to further improve upon and reconceptualize media violence exposure measurement.

scholarly journals Development and cross-cultural testing of the International Depression Symptom Scale (IDSS): a measurement instrument designed to represent global presentations of depression

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. E. Haroz ◽  
J. Bass ◽  
C. Lee ◽  
S. S. Oo ◽  
K. Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Depression Symptom ◽  
Symptom Scale ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

BackgroundSelf-report measurement instruments are commonly used to screen for mental health disorders in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC). The Western origins of most depression instruments may constitute a bias when used globally. Western measures based on the DSM, do not fully capture the expression of depression globally. We developed a self-report scale design to address this limitation, the International Depression Symptom Scale-General version (IDSS-G), based on empirical evidence of the signs and symptoms of depression reported across cultures. This paper describes the rationale and process of its development and the results of an initial test among a non-Western population.MethodsWe evaluated internal consistency reliability, test–retest reliability and inter-rater reliability of the IDSS-G in a sample N = 147 male and female attendees of primary health clinics in Yangon, Myanmar. For criterion validity, IDSS-G scores were compared with diagnosis by local psychiatrists using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID). Construct validity was evaluated by investigating associations between the IDSS-G and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), impaired function, and suicidal ideation.ResultsThe IDSS-G showed high internal consistency reliability (α = 0.92), test–retest reliability (r = 0.87), and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.90). Strong correlations between the IDSS-G and PHQ-9, functioning, and suicidal ideation supported construct validity. Criterion validity was supported for use of the IDSS-G to identify people with a SCID diagnosed depressive disorder (major depression/dysthymia). The IDSS-G also demonstrated incremental validity by predicting functional impairment beyond that predicted by the PHQ-9. Results suggest that the IDSS-G accurately assesses depression in this population. Future testing in other populations will follow.

Test-Retest Reliability of the Holyoake Codependency Index with Australian Students

2004 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 482-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg E. Dear
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Full Scale Test ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
External Focus ◽  
Scale Test ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Report Measure

The Holyoake Codependency Index is a 13-item self-report measure of three aspects of codependency: External Focus, Self-sacrifice, and a sense of being overwhelmed by another person's problematic behavior (termed Reactivity). Previous studies have supported internal validity and the internal consistency and construct validity of the subscales. The present scores for 59 students indicate full scale test-retest reliability of .88 and for subscales (.76 to .82) over a 3-wk. interval.

scholarly journals Reliability and Construct Validity of Self-Report Questionnaires for Patients With Pelvic Girdle Pain

2012 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margreth Grotle ◽  
Andrew M. Garratt ◽  
Hanne Krogstad Jenssen ◽  
Britt Stuge
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Pelvic Girdle ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Pelvic Girdle Pain ◽  
Consistency Test ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Background There is little evidence for the measurement properties of instruments commonly used for women with pelvic girdle pain. Objective The aim of this study was to examine the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of instruments used for women with pelvic girdle pain. Design This was a cross-sectional methodology study, including test-retest reliability assessment. Methods Women with pelvic girdle pain in pregnancy and after delivery participated in a postal survey that included the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire (PGQ), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Disability Rating Index (DRI), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and 8-item version of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36). Test-retest reliability was assessed with a random subsample 1 week later. Internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha, and test-retest reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Construct validity based on hypotheses was assessed by correlation analysis. Discriminant validity was assessed with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results All participants responded to the main (N=87) and test-retest (n=42) surveys. Cronbach alpha values ranged from .88 to .94, and ICCs ranged from .78 to .94. The MDC at the individual level constituted about 7% to 14% of total scores for the 8-item version of the SF-36, ODI, and PGQ activity subscale; about 18% to 22% for the DRI, PGQ symptom subscale, and PCS; and about 25% for the FABQ. Hypotheses were mostly confirmed by correlations between the instruments. The PGQ was the only instrument that significantly discriminated participants who were pregnant from participants who were not pregnant as well as pain locations. Limitations A comparison of responsiveness to change of the various instruments used in this study was not undertaken, but will be carried out in a future study. Conclusions Self-report instruments for assessing health showed good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity for women with pelvic girdle pain. The PGQ was the only instrument with satisfactory discriminant validity, thus, it is recommended for evaluating symptoms and disability in patients with pelvic girdle pain.

scholarly journals Reliability and Validity of the German Version of the Emotional Style Questionnaire

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darko Jekauc ◽  
Lea Mülberger ◽  
Susanne Weyland ◽  
Fabienne Ennigkeit ◽  
Kathrin Wunsch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
German Version ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Emotional Style

Until recently, emotional processes have played little role in personality psychology. Based on neuroscientific findings, Davidson and colleagues proposed a theory of emotional styles, postulating six dimensions of emotional life: outlook, resilience, social intuition, self-awareness, sensitivity to context, and attention. Recently, an English version of the Emotional Style Questionnaire (ESQ) was developed and tested for reliability and validity. The aim of the present work was to test the test–retest reliability, internal consistency, construct validity, and criterion validity of the German version of the ESQ. Two separate samples consisting of 365 and 344 subjects took part in an online survey. The results of the two studies indicated satisfactory test–retest reliability and internal consistency. Regarding the construct validity, the results from Study 1 to Study 2 indicate good model fit indices. Although there was a high correlation between the subscales outlook and resilience, the analyses supported the six-factor structure postulated by Davidson and colleagues. Substantial correlations were found between the dimensions of the ESQ and other validated scales, confirming the criterion validity of the questionnaire. Our results suggest that the German version of the ESQ is a reliable and valid measurement of emotional styles. It is a feasible and economical questionnaire that can be applied in various psychology disciplines, such as personality psychology, clinical psychology, industrial psychology or sport and exercise psychology.

Preliminary Study of the Bilingual Version of Creative Motivation Inventory

1994 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 393-394
Author(s):  
Ananda Kumar Palaniappan
Keyword(s):  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
False Self ◽  
Preliminary Study ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Malaysian Students ◽  
High Test ◽  
True False

A bilingual version of Torrance's Creative Motivation Inventory was administered to 64 Malaysian students. The 28-item true-false self-report was found to have moderate to high test-retest reliability and criterion validity. Replication with other groups is recommended.

scholarly journals The Chinese version of the American shoulder and elbow surgeons standardized shoulder assessment form questionnaire, patient self-report section: a cross-cultural adaptation and validation study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tung-Hee Albert Tie ◽  
Chih-Kai Hong ◽  
Illich Chua ◽  
Fa-Chuan Kuan ◽  
Wei-Ren Su ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Cultural Adaptation ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Chinese Version ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Cross Cultural Adaptation ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background The patient self-report section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASESp) is one of the most validated and reliable assessment tools. This study aimed to establish a validated Chinese version of ASESp (ASESp-CH). Methods A clinical prospective study was performed (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04755049; registered on 2021/02/11). Following the guidelines of forward-backward translation and cross-cultural adaptation, a Chinese version of ASESp was established. Patients older than 18 years with shoulder disorders were included. Patients who could not complete test-retest questionnaires within the interval of 7–30 days and patients who received interventions were excluded. Intraclass correlation (ICC) was calculated for test- retest reliability, whereas internal consistency was determined by Cronbach value. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing the corresponding domains between the ASESp-CH and a validated Chinese version of 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Results A total of 86 patients were included with a mean test-retest interval of 12 ± 5.4 days. Test-retest reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.94. Good internal consistency was found, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.86. Construct validity of the ASESp-CH questionnaire was good. The major domains of the ASESp-CH were significantly correlated with the respective domains in the SF-36 (p <  0.01), except for the domain of stability of ASESp-CH. Conclusions The Chinese version of ASESp questionnaire is a highly validated and reliable tool for shoulder disorder assessment.

scholarly journals Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pek Ling Teo ◽  
Rana S Hinman ◽  
Thorlene Egerton ◽  
Krysia S Dziedzic ◽  
Jess Kasza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Quality Indicator ◽  
Clinical Guideline ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. Methods: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n=9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. Results: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen’s Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen’s Kappa estimates ranged from -0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (-0.14, 0.34). Conclusions: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of the Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale (SIDAS) in a longitudinal sample of people experiencing non-affective psychosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamelia Harris ◽  
Gillian Haddock ◽  
Sarah Peters ◽  
Patricia Gooding
Keyword(s):  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Suicide Ideation ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Affective Psychosis ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
High Internal Consistency ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background Suicidal ideation is a key precursor for suicide attempts and suicide deaths. Performing routine screening of suicide precursors can help identify people who are at high risk of death by suicide. This is, arguably, an important suicide prevention effort. The aim of this study was to assess the validity, reliability, and factor structure of the Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale (SIDAS) in a three-month longitudinal study with people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or non-affective psychosis and experiences of suicidal ideation and/or behaviours. It was predicted that the SIDAS would have high internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent, discriminant and construct validity. Methods Ninety-nine participants experiencing psychosis completed the SIDAS at baseline and 89 participants completed it 3 months later. Additionally, participants completed a demographic questionnaire, the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation, the Beck Hopelessness Scale, and the Defeat and Entrapment Scales. The internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the SIDAS were investigated in comparison to other constructs. Factor analysis was performed to examine the factor structure of the scale. Results Principal component analysis yielded a theoretically coherent one-dimensional factor structure of SIDAS, suggesting good construct validity (PCA = .71). The SIDAS had high internal consistency (α = .89) and good test-retest reliability (α = .73). It was highly correlated with other self-report measures, including the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation, Beck Hopelessness Scale, Defeat and Entrapment scales, indicating excellent construct validity. Conclusion The SIDAS is a valid and reliable self-report instrument for assessing the severity of suicidal ideation in a population of people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or non-affective psychosis. Further research should test the psychometric properties of the scale in individuals experiencing different mental health problems in cross-cultural settings, in order to establish its broader validity, reliability, and clinical utility.

scholarly journals The Physical Activity Scale for Individuals with Physical Disabilities: Test-Retest Reliability and Comparison With an Accelerometer

2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidde P. van der Ploeg ◽  
Kitty R.M. Streppel ◽  
Allard J. van der Beek ◽  
Luc H.V. van der Woude ◽  
Miriam Vollenbroek-Hutten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Physical Disabilities ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Spearman Correlation ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Cord Injury ◽  
Activity Scale ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Physical Activity Scale

Background:The objective was to determine the test-retest reliability and criterion validity of the Physical Activity Scale for Individuals with Physical Disabilities (PASIPD).Methods:Forty-five non-wheelchair dependent subjects were recruited from three Dutch rehabilitation centers. Subjects’ diagnoses were: stroke, spinal cord injury, whiplash, and neurological-, orthopedic- or back disorders. The PASIPD is a 7-d recall physical activity questionnaire that was completed twice, 1 wk apart. During this week, physical activity was also measured with an Actigraph accelerometer.Results:The test-retest reliability Spearman correlation of the PASIPD was 0.77. The criterion validity Spearman correlation was 0.30 when compared to the accelerometer.Conclusions:The PASIPD had test-retest reliability and criterion validity that is comparable to well established self-report physical activity questionnaires from the general population.

scholarly journals Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pek Ling Teo ◽  
Rana S Hinman ◽  
Thorlene Egerton ◽  
Krysia S Dziedzic ◽  
Jess Kasza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Quality Indicator ◽  
Clinical Guideline ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. Methods: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n=9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. Results: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen’s Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen’s Kappa estimates ranged from -0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (-0.14, 0.34). Conclusions: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document