Vânia Rocha1, Marina P Guerra2, Marina S Lemos2, Elbert D Glover3. 1. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences of University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. vmasrocha@gmail.com. 2. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences of University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 3. University of Maryland School of Public Health, College Park, MD, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Portuguese version of the Glover-Nilsson Smoking Behavioral Questionnaire (GNSBQ). METHODS: This manuscript represents 2 studies. In the first, the free-translated Portuguese version of GNSBQ, currently in use, was administered to 124 healthy smokers for Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). In the second, a forward-backward translation was developed to achieve a proper cultural and linguistic adaptation, which allowed creating a new Portuguese version of the GNSBQ. An Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was then performed, including 120 healthy smokers who completed this new version. RESULTS: In the first study, the results from performing a CFA were not acceptable, although the scale was internally consistent. The second study showed that the new Portuguese version of GNSBQ presented reliability and 2 cor-related factors retrieved from the EFA. CONCLUSION: The new Portuguese version of the second study will contribute to an improved assessment of behavioral dependence in that population.
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Portuguese version of the Glover-Nilsson Smoking Behavioral Questionnaire (GNSBQ). METHODS: This manuscript represents 2 studies. In the first, the free-translated Portuguese version of GNSBQ, currently in use, was administered to 124 healthy smokers for Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). In the second, a forward-backward translation was developed to achieve a proper cultural and linguistic adaptation, which allowed creating a new Portuguese version of the GNSBQ. An Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was then performed, including 120 healthy smokers who completed this new version. RESULTS: In the first study, the results from performing a CFA were not acceptable, although the scale was internally consistent. The second study showed that the new Portuguese version of GNSBQ presented reliability and 2 cor-related factors retrieved from the EFA. CONCLUSION: The new Portuguese version of the second study will contribute to an improved assessment of behavioral dependence in that population.