Winnie W S Mak1, Randolph C H Chan2, Sania S W Yau3. 1. Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong. wwsmak@psy.cuhk.edu.hk. 2. Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong. 3. New Life Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Given the absence of well-validated measures to measure personal recovery in the Chinese communities, this study translated the 24-item Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS-24) into Chinese, investigated its psychometric properties, and confirmed its five-factor structure, as proposed by Corrigan et al. (Schizophr Bull 30(4):1035-1041, 2004), among a sample of people in recovery of mental illness in Hong Kong. METHODS: A sample of 596 people in recovery was recruited for scale validation. The RAS-24 was translated into traditional Chinese, and its factor structure was tested by confirmatory factor analysis. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were used to assess the internal consistency of the Chinese version of the RAS-24 (RAS-C). Concurrent and construct validity were examined by investigating the correlation of the RAS-C with Recovery Markers Questionnaire (RMQ), Test's Life Satisfaction Scale, Self-Stigma Scale, and Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale. RESULTS: The RAS-C full scale and subscales yielded good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .73-.93). The finding supported the five-factor solution proposed by Corrigan et al. (2004), χ2(242) = 783.81, p < .001, CFI = .91, RMSEA = .06, SRMR = .05. The RAS-C has established concurrent validity with RMQ and demonstrated construct validity with life satisfaction, self-stigma, as well as symptoms and functional difficulties. CONCLUSION: The Chinese version of the RAS-24 was found to have promising psychometric properties in assessing the subjective perception of recovery among Hong Kong Chinese. The validation of RAS-C among Chinese enables its usage to gauge personal recovery outcomes among Chinese in recovery. In addition, the validated measure can contribute to the comparison of recovery across English-speaking and Chinese-speaking samples.
OBJECTIVE: Given the absence of well-validated measures to measure personal recovery in the Chinese communities, this study translated the 24-item Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS-24) into Chinese, investigated its psychometric properties, and confirmed its five-factor structure, as proposed by Corrigan et al. (Schizophr Bull 30(4):1035-1041, 2004), among a sample of people in recovery of mental illness in Hong Kong. METHODS: A sample of 596 people in recovery was recruited for scale validation. The RAS-24 was translated into traditional Chinese, and its factor structure was tested by confirmatory factor analysis. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were used to assess the internal consistency of the Chinese version of the RAS-24 (RAS-C). Concurrent and construct validity were examined by investigating the correlation of the RAS-C with Recovery Markers Questionnaire (RMQ), Test's Life Satisfaction Scale, Self-Stigma Scale, and Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale. RESULTS: The RAS-C full scale and subscales yielded good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .73-.93). The finding supported the five-factor solution proposed by Corrigan et al. (2004), χ2(242) = 783.81, p < .001, CFI = .91, RMSEA = .06, SRMR = .05. The RAS-C has established concurrent validity with RMQ and demonstrated construct validity with life satisfaction, self-stigma, as well as symptoms and functional difficulties. CONCLUSION: The Chinese version of the RAS-24 was found to have promising psychometric properties in assessing the subjective perception of recovery among Hong Kong Chinese. The validation of RAS-C among Chinese enables its usage to gauge personal recovery outcomes among Chinese in recovery. In addition, the validated measure can contribute to the comparison of recovery across English-speaking and Chinese-speaking samples.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chinese; Hong Kong; People in recovery of mental illness; Recovery Assessment Scale; Reliability; Validity