Literature DB >> 22339311

The importance of modeling method effects: resolving the (uni)dimensionality of the loneliness questionnaire.

Chad Ebesutani1, Christopher F Drescher, Steven P Reise, Laurie Heiden, Terry L Hight, John D Damon, John Young.   

Abstract

This study sought to resolve the dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire (LQ; Asher, Hymel, & Renshaw, 1984) by applying recommended confirmatory factor analytic procedures that control for method effects (Brown, 2003). This study was needed given that inconsistent findings have been reported recently regarding the structure of this instrument (Bagner, Storch, & Roberti, 2004) and all models to date have not accounted for method effects due to the non-reversed-worded and reversed-worded items of this instrument. Using a large sample of youth in Grades 2 through 12 (N = 11,725), we compared the previously reported 1- and 2-factor models with a newly posited 1-factor model that incorporated correlated error terms to account for method effects. We found that the 1-factor model that included correlated error terms fit the data best, and that this factor structure evidenced measurement invariance across boys and girls in childhood, but not in adolescence. The meaning of the LQ indicators was also consistent for boys across development, but evidenced differences for girls in childhood versus adolescence. More generally, it was demonstrated that modeling method effects is vital to accurately understanding the dimensionality of loneliness when reversed-worded and non-reversed-worded items are used as indicators. The measurement and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22339311     DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2011.627967

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pers Assess        ISSN: 0022-3891


  6 in total

1.  Item Response Theory Models for Wording Effects in Mixed-Format Scales.

Authors:  Wen-Chung Wang; Hui-Fang Chen; Kuan-Yu Jin
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2014-04-06       Impact factor: 2.821

2.  Development and initial validation of the Child Disgust Scale.

Authors:  Megan A Viar-Paxton; Chad Ebesutani; Eun Ha Kim; Thomas Ollendick; John Young; Bunmi O Olatunji
Journal:  Psychol Assess       Date:  2015-04-06

3.  Energy, fatigue, or both? A bifactor modeling approach to the conceptualization and measurement of vitality.

Authors:  Nina Deng; Rick Guyer; John E Ware
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-11-02       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Pacifists and Revenge-Seekers in Response to Unambiguous Peer Provocation.

Authors:  Kristina L McDonald; Steven R Asher
Journal:  J Youth Adolesc       Date:  2018-01-19

Review 5.  How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales.

Authors:  Marlies Maes; Pamela Qualter; Gerine M A Lodder; Marcus Mund
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 4.614

6.  Quality-of-life assessment in dementia: the use of DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy total scores.

Authors:  Kia-Chong Chua; Anna Brown; Ryan Little; David Matthews; Liam Morton; Vanessa Loftus; Caroline Watchurst; Rhian Tait; Renee Romeo; Sube Banerjee
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-06-18       Impact factor: 4.147

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.