2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/163780
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Confirmatory Factor Evidence For The SUPPH
Author(s):
Owen, Steven
Author Details:
Steven Owen, Professor, University of Texas Medical Branch, School of Nursing, Galveston, Texas, USA, email: svowen@utmb.edu
Abstract:
Background. Of the many forms of quantitative validity evidence, a crucial first step is to verify the dimensionality of a construct. It is such evidence that leads to a credible scoring protocol. When a researcher is wrong about dimensionality (e.g., proposes a single dimension when there are three), then the scoring of an instrument is incorrect, reliability estimations are harmed, and additional validity evidence is undependable. Perhaps the worst outcome occurs when an improperly scored instrument is used in evaluation research, for example, to evaluate the worth of an intervention. Purpose. The goal of this study was to confirm the proposed dimensionality of a self-care self-efficacy measure, the Strategies Used by People to Promote Health (SUPPH; Lev & Owen, 1996). Six logical categories had steered the generation of the original SUPPH item pool. However, an exploratory common factor analysis rearranged and reduced the categories to four, each with acceptable reliability estimates. Methods. Subsequent SUPPH data sets, gathered from patients undergoing treatment for various forms of cancer, were combined for a confirmatory factor analysis of the four-factor model (N = 398). A four-factor measurement model was created, showing which SUPPH items corresponded to each hypothesized factor. AMOS 4.0 (Arbuckle & Wothke, 1999) was used to test the measurement model. Results and Conclusions. The four-factor model showed acceptable fit indices (e.g., Bentler-Bonett NFI = .99, Tucker-Lewis Index = .99, residual mean square error = .08). However, the model showed some redundancies, with one of the factors, Coping, showing correlations in the .70s with two of its companion factors, Stress and Optimism. A revised confirmatory measurement model was built, combining two of the highly related factors (Coping and Optimism became Positive Attitude). This three-factor model showed fit indices not appreciably different from the four-factor model. Parsimony favors the three-factor model. Thus, the most reasonable measurement model for the SUPPH shows a simpler structure than originally derived from the exploratory factor analysis. The SUPPH should now be scored for three dimensions, Positive Attitudes (coefficient Alpha = .92), Stress (.89), and Making Decisions (.83). We discuss new data collection efforts with diverse samples to replicate the confirmatory measurement model. Additional data also paves the way to begin creating convergent and discriminant portions of a multi-trait, multi-method matrix for additional validity evidence. Also, larger data bases allow more comprehensive tests of the SUPPH, as, for example, multi-group comparisons within confirmatory factor analysis.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Date:
2001
Conference Name:
ENRS 13th Annual Scientific Sessions
Conference Host:
Eastern Nursing Research Society
Conference Location:
Atlantic City, New Jersey, USA
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleConfirmatory Factor Evidence For The SUPPHen_GB
dc.contributor.authorOwen, Stevenen_US
dc.author.detailsSteven Owen, Professor, University of Texas Medical Branch, School of Nursing, Galveston, Texas, USA, email: svowen@utmb.eduen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/163780-
dc.description.abstractBackground. Of the many forms of quantitative validity evidence, a crucial first step is to verify the dimensionality of a construct. It is such evidence that leads to a credible scoring protocol. When a researcher is wrong about dimensionality (e.g., proposes a single dimension when there are three), then the scoring of an instrument is incorrect, reliability estimations are harmed, and additional validity evidence is undependable. Perhaps the worst outcome occurs when an improperly scored instrument is used in evaluation research, for example, to evaluate the worth of an intervention. Purpose. The goal of this study was to confirm the proposed dimensionality of a self-care self-efficacy measure, the Strategies Used by People to Promote Health (SUPPH; Lev & Owen, 1996). Six logical categories had steered the generation of the original SUPPH item pool. However, an exploratory common factor analysis rearranged and reduced the categories to four, each with acceptable reliability estimates. Methods. Subsequent SUPPH data sets, gathered from patients undergoing treatment for various forms of cancer, were combined for a confirmatory factor analysis of the four-factor model (N = 398). A four-factor measurement model was created, showing which SUPPH items corresponded to each hypothesized factor. AMOS 4.0 (Arbuckle & Wothke, 1999) was used to test the measurement model. Results and Conclusions. The four-factor model showed acceptable fit indices (e.g., Bentler-Bonett NFI = .99, Tucker-Lewis Index = .99, residual mean square error = .08). However, the model showed some redundancies, with one of the factors, Coping, showing correlations in the .70s with two of its companion factors, Stress and Optimism. A revised confirmatory measurement model was built, combining two of the highly related factors (Coping and Optimism became Positive Attitude). This three-factor model showed fit indices not appreciably different from the four-factor model. Parsimony favors the three-factor model. Thus, the most reasonable measurement model for the SUPPH shows a simpler structure than originally derived from the exploratory factor analysis. The SUPPH should now be scored for three dimensions, Positive Attitudes (coefficient Alpha = .92), Stress (.89), and Making Decisions (.83). We discuss new data collection efforts with diverse samples to replicate the confirmatory measurement model. Additional data also paves the way to begin creating convergent and discriminant portions of a multi-trait, multi-method matrix for additional validity evidence. Also, larger data bases allow more comprehensive tests of the SUPPH, as, for example, multi-group comparisons within confirmatory factor analysis.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T11:13:42Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T11:13:42Z-
dc.conference.date2001en_US
dc.conference.nameENRS 13th Annual Scientific Sessionsen_US
dc.conference.hostEastern Nursing Research Societyen_US
dc.conference.locationAtlantic City, New Jersey, USAen_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.