Mona Eklund1, Martin Bäckström2, Lars Hansson1. 1. a Department of Health Sciences , Lund University , Lund , Sweden. 2. b Department of Psychology , Lund University , Lund , Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The widely used Rosenberg's self-esteem scale (RSES) has not been evaluated for psychometric properties in Sweden. AIMS: This study aimed at analyzing its factor structure, internal consistency, criterion, convergent and discriminant validity, sensitivity to change, and whether a four-graded Likert-type response scale increased its reliability and validity compared to a yes/no response scale. METHODS: People with mental illness participating in intervention studies to (1) promote everyday life balance (N = 223) or (2) remedy self-stigma (N = 103) were included. Both samples completed the RSES and questionnaires addressing quality of life and sociodemographic data. Sample 1 also completed instruments chosen to assess convergent and discriminant validity: self-mastery (convergent validity), level of functioning and occupational engagement (discriminant validity). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), structural equation modeling, and conventional inferential statistics were used. RESULTS: Based on both samples, the Swedish RSES formed one factor and exhibited high internal consistency (>0.90). The two response scales were equivalent. Criterion validity in relation to quality of life was demonstrated. RSES could distinguish between women and men (women scoring lower) and between diagnostic groups (people with depression scoring lower). Correlations >0.5 with variables chosen to reflect convergent validity and around 0.2 with variables used to address discriminant validity further highlighted the construct validity of RSES. The instrument also showed sensitivity to change. CONCLUSIONS: The Swedish RSES exhibited a one-component factor structure and showed good psychometric properties in terms of good internal consistency, criterion, convergent and discriminant validity, and sensitivity to change. The yes/no and the four-graded Likert-type response scales worked equivalently.
BACKGROUND: The widely used Rosenberg's self-esteem scale (RSES) has not been evaluated for psychometric properties in Sweden. AIMS: This study aimed at analyzing its factor structure, internal consistency, criterion, convergent and discriminant validity, sensitivity to change, and whether a four-graded Likert-type response scale increased its reliability and validity compared to a yes/no response scale. METHODS:People with mental illness participating in intervention studies to (1) promote everyday life balance (N = 223) or (2) remedy self-stigma (N = 103) were included. Both samples completed the RSES and questionnaires addressing quality of life and sociodemographic data. Sample 1 also completed instruments chosen to assess convergent and discriminant validity: self-mastery (convergent validity), level of functioning and occupational engagement (discriminant validity). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), structural equation modeling, and conventional inferential statistics were used. RESULTS: Based on both samples, the Swedish RSES formed one factor and exhibited high internal consistency (>0.90). The two response scales were equivalent. Criterion validity in relation to quality of life was demonstrated. RSES could distinguish between women and men (women scoring lower) and between diagnostic groups (people with depression scoring lower). Correlations >0.5 with variables chosen to reflect convergent validity and around 0.2 with variables used to address discriminant validity further highlighted the construct validity of RSES. The instrument also showed sensitivity to change. CONCLUSIONS: The Swedish RSES exhibited a one-component factor structure and showed good psychometric properties in terms of good internal consistency, criterion, convergent and discriminant validity, and sensitivity to change. The yes/no and the four-graded Likert-type response scales worked equivalently.
Authors: Miek C Jong; Eric Mulder; Agnete E Kristoffersen; Trine Stub; Heléne Dahlqvist; Eija Viitasara; E Anne Lown; Winnie Schats; Mats Jong Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-05-09 Impact factor: 3.006