BACKGROUND: There is controversy surrounding the factor structure of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI), a widely used instrument for assessing perceived parental rearing behaviours. Recent studies have proposed five different factor structures, including Parker et al.'s original two-factor model. METHODS: Four hundred and eighteen employed Japanese adults filled out the PBI. Maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analyses were performed to compare the five different factor structures in terms of model-fit. RESULTS: Parker's original two-factor structure fitted the data poorly. In general, three-factor structures showed better fit. Among the three-factor structures, Murphy's model and Kendler's model were superior (the adjusted goodness-of-fit index > 0.8), with the latter providing the best fit to the data (the goodness-of-fit index > 0.9). When considering invariance of factor structure across gender subgroups and across age subgroups, only Kendler's model was acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: Parker's two-factor structure of the PBI may not be appropriate for assessing perceived parental rearing behaviours in a Japanese population. Three-factor structures, in particular Murphy's model and Kendler's model, are preferable. Kendler's model provided the best fit to the data and was relatively invariant across the subgroups in this study. Thus, Kendler's model might prove to be very important for obtaining a factor structure invariant across different cultures.
BACKGROUND: There is controversy surrounding the factor structure of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI), a widely used instrument for assessing perceived parental rearing behaviours. Recent studies have proposed five different factor structures, including Parker et al.'s original two-factor model. METHODS: Four hundred and eighteen employed Japanese adults filled out the PBI. Maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analyses were performed to compare the five different factor structures in terms of model-fit. RESULTS: Parker's original two-factor structure fitted the data poorly. In general, three-factor structures showed better fit. Among the three-factor structures, Murphy's model and Kendler's model were superior (the adjusted goodness-of-fit index > 0.8), with the latter providing the best fit to the data (the goodness-of-fit index > 0.9). When considering invariance of factor structure across gender subgroups and across age subgroups, only Kendler's model was acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: Parker's two-factor structure of the PBI may not be appropriate for assessing perceived parental rearing behaviours in a Japanese population. Three-factor structures, in particular Murphy's model and Kendler's model, are preferable. Kendler's model provided the best fit to the data and was relatively invariant across the subgroups in this study. Thus, Kendler's model might prove to be very important for obtaining a factor structure invariant across different cultures.
Authors: Takeshi Otowa; Charles O Gardner; Kenneth S Kendler; John M Hettema Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2013-01-24 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: J Gao; Y Li; Y Cai; J Chen; Y Shen; S Ni; Y Wei; Y Qiu; X Zhu; Y Liu; C Lu; C Chen; Q Niu; C Tang; Y Yang; Q Wang; W Cui; J Xia; T Liu; J Zhang; B Zhao; Z Guo; J Pan; H Chen; Y Luo; L Sun; X Xiao; Q Chen; X Zhao; F He; L Lv; L Guo; L Liu; H Li; S Shi; J Flint; K S Kendler; M Tao Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2011-09-27 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: L Wang; L Liu; S Shi; J Gao; Y Liu; Y Li; Z Zhang; G Wang; K Zhang; M Tao; C Gao; K Li; X Wang; L Lv; G Jiang; X Wang; H Jia; J Zhang; C Lu; Y Li; K Li; C Hu; Y Ning; Y Li; J Sun; T Liu; Y Zhang; B Ha; H Tian; H Meng; J Hu; Y Chen; H Deng; G Huang; W Wu; G Li; X Fang; J Pan; X Hong; S Gao; X Li; D Yang; G Chen; T Liu; M Cai; J Dong; Q Mei; Z Shen; R Pan; Z Liu; X Wang; Y Tan; J Flint; K S Kendler Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 7.723