Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 10/2016

01-10-2016 | Brief Communication

Testing the measurement invariance of the University of Washington Self-Efficacy Scale short form across four diagnostic subgroups

Auteurs: Hyewon Chung, Jiseon Kim, Ryoungsun Park, Alyssa M. Bamer, Fraser D. Bocell, Dagmar Amtmann

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 10/2016

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Purpose

The University of Washington Self-Efficacy Scale (UW-SES) was originally developed for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and spinal cord injury (SCI). This study evaluates the measurement invariance of the 6-item short form of the UW-SES across four disability subgroups. Evidence of measurement invariance would extend the UW-SES for use in two additional diagnostic groups: muscular dystrophy (MD) and post-polio syndrome (PPS).

Methods

Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate successive levels of measurement invariance of the 6-item short form, the UW-SES: (a) configural invariance, i.e., equivalent item-factor structures between groups; (b) metric invariance, i.e., equivalent unstandardized factor loadings between groups; and (c) scalar invariance, i.e., equivalent item intercepts between groups. Responses from the four groups with different diagnostic disorders were compared: MD (n = 172), MS (n = 868), PPS (n = 225), and SCI (n = 242).

Results

The results of this study support that the most rigorous form of invariance (i.e., scalar) holds for the 6-item short form of the UW-SES across the four diagnostic subgroups.

Conclusions

The current study suggests that the 6-item short form of the UW-SES has the same meaning across the four diagnostic subgroups. Thus, the 6-item short form is validated for people with MD, MS, PPS, and SCI.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
go back to reference Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
2.
go back to reference Rothrock, N. E., Hays, R. D., Spritzer, K., Yount, S. E., Riley, W., & Cella, D. (2010). Relative to the general US population, chronic diseases are associated with poorer health-related quality of life as measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1195–1204.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rothrock, N. E., Hays, R. D., Spritzer, K., Yount, S. E., Riley, W., & Cella, D. (2010). Relative to the general US population, chronic diseases are associated with poorer health-related quality of life as measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1195–1204.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Schmitt, M. M., Goverover, Y., DeLuca, J., & Chiaravalloti, N. (2014). Self-efficacy as a predictor of self-reported physical, cognitive, and social functioning in multiple sclerosis. Rehabilitation Psychology, 59(1), 27–34.CrossRefPubMed Schmitt, M. M., Goverover, Y., DeLuca, J., & Chiaravalloti, N. (2014). Self-efficacy as a predictor of self-reported physical, cognitive, and social functioning in multiple sclerosis. Rehabilitation Psychology, 59(1), 27–34.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Marks, R., & Allegrante, J. P. (2005). A review and synthesis of research evidence for self-efficacy-enhancing interventions for reducing chronic disability: Implications for health education practice (part II). Health Promotion Practice, 6(2), 148–156.CrossRefPubMed Marks, R., & Allegrante, J. P. (2005). A review and synthesis of research evidence for self-efficacy-enhancing interventions for reducing chronic disability: Implications for health education practice (part II). Health Promotion Practice, 6(2), 148–156.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Sherer, M., Maddux, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51(2), 663–671.CrossRef Sherer, M., Maddux, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51(2), 663–671.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Airlie, J., Baker, G. A., Smith, S. J., & Young, C. A. (2001). Measuring the impact of multiple sclerosis on psychosocial functioning: The development of a new self-efficacy scale. Clinical Rehabilitation, 15(3), 259–265.CrossRefPubMed Airlie, J., Baker, G. A., Smith, S. J., & Young, C. A. (2001). Measuring the impact of multiple sclerosis on psychosocial functioning: The development of a new self-efficacy scale. Clinical Rehabilitation, 15(3), 259–265.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Middleton, J. W., Tate, R. L., & Geraghty, T. J. (2003). Self-efficacy and spinal cord injury: Psychometric properties of a new scale. Rehabilitation Psychology, 48(4), 281–288.CrossRef Middleton, J. W., Tate, R. L., & Geraghty, T. J. (2003). Self-efficacy and spinal cord injury: Psychometric properties of a new scale. Rehabilitation Psychology, 48(4), 281–288.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Horn, W., Yoels, W., Wallace, D., Macrina, D., & Wrigley, M. (1998). Determinants of self-efficacy among persons with spinal cord injuries. Disability and Rehabilitation, 20(4), 138–141.CrossRefPubMed Horn, W., Yoels, W., Wallace, D., Macrina, D., & Wrigley, M. (1998). Determinants of self-efficacy among persons with spinal cord injuries. Disability and Rehabilitation, 20(4), 138–141.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Tedman, S., Thornton, E., & Baker, G. (1995). Development of a scale to measure core beliefs and perceived self efficacy in adults with epilepsy. Seizure, 4(3), 221–231.CrossRefPubMed Tedman, S., Thornton, E., & Baker, G. (1995). Development of a scale to measure core beliefs and perceived self efficacy in adults with epilepsy. Seizure, 4(3), 221–231.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Lorig, K., Chastain, R. L., Ung, E., Shoor, S., & Holman, H. R. (1989). Development and evaluation of a scale to measure perceived self-efficacy in people with arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 32(1), 37–44.CrossRefPubMed Lorig, K., Chastain, R. L., Ung, E., Shoor, S., & Holman, H. R. (1989). Development and evaluation of a scale to measure perceived self-efficacy in people with arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 32(1), 37–44.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Shnek, Z. M., Foley, F. W., LaRocca, N. G., Gordon, W. A., DeLuca, J., Schwartzman, H. G., et al. (1997). Helplessness, self-efficacy, cognitive distortions, and depression in multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injury. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 19(3), 287–294.CrossRefPubMed Shnek, Z. M., Foley, F. W., LaRocca, N. G., Gordon, W. A., DeLuca, J., Schwartzman, H. G., et al. (1997). Helplessness, self-efficacy, cognitive distortions, and depression in multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injury. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 19(3), 287–294.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy as a resource factor in stress appraisal processes. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 195–213). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy as a resource factor in stress appraisal processes. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 195–213). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
13.
go back to reference Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.CrossRef Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Milsap, R. E. (2012). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. New York: Routledge. Milsap, R. E. (2012). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. New York: Routledge.
15.
go back to reference Kim, E. S., & Yoon, M. (2011). Testing measurement invariance: A comparison of multiple-group categorical CFA and IRT. Structural Equation Modeling, 18(2), 212–228.CrossRef Kim, E. S., & Yoon, M. (2011). Testing measurement invariance: A comparison of multiple-group categorical CFA and IRT. Structural Equation Modeling, 18(2), 212–228.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Stark, S., Chernshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292–1306.CrossRefPubMed Stark, S., Chernshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292–1306.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 552–566.CrossRefPubMed Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 552–566.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Amtmann, D., Bamer, A. M., Cook, K. F., Askew, R. L., Noonan, V. K., & Brockway, J. A. (2012). University of Washington self-efficacy scale: A new self-efficacy scale for people with disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 93(10), 1757–1765.CrossRefPubMed Amtmann, D., Bamer, A. M., Cook, K. F., Askew, R. L., Noonan, V. K., & Brockway, J. A. (2012). University of Washington self-efficacy scale: A new self-efficacy scale for people with disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 93(10), 1757–1765.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Noonan, V. K., Cook, K. F., Bamer, A. M., Choi, S. W., Kim, J., & Amtmann, D. (2012). Measuring fatigue in persons with multiple sclerosis: Creating a crosswalk between the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale and the PROMIS Fatigue Short Form. Quality of Life Research, 21(7), 1123–1133.CrossRefPubMed Noonan, V. K., Cook, K. F., Bamer, A. M., Choi, S. W., Kim, J., & Amtmann, D. (2012). Measuring fatigue in persons with multiple sclerosis: Creating a crosswalk between the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale and the PROMIS Fatigue Short Form. Quality of Life Research, 21(7), 1123–1133.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Matsuda, P. N., Shumway-Cook, A., Bamer, A. M., Johnson, S. L., Amtmann, D., & Kraft, G. H. (2011). Falls in multiple sclerosis. PM&R, 3(7), 624–632.CrossRef Matsuda, P. N., Shumway-Cook, A., Bamer, A. M., Johnson, S. L., Amtmann, D., & Kraft, G. H. (2011). Falls in multiple sclerosis. PM&R, 3(7), 624–632.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Cook, K. F., Molton, I. R., & Jensen, M. P. (2011). Fatigue and aging with a disability. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92(7), 1126–1133.CrossRefPubMed Cook, K. F., Molton, I. R., & Jensen, M. P. (2011). Fatigue and aging with a disability. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92(7), 1126–1133.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Molton, I., Cook, K. F., Smith, A. E., Amtmann, D., Chen, W. H., & Jensen, M. P. (2014). Prevalence and impact of pain in adults aging with a physical disability: Comparison to a US general population sample. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 30(4), 307–315.CrossRefPubMed Molton, I., Cook, K. F., Smith, A. E., Amtmann, D., Chen, W. H., & Jensen, M. P. (2014). Prevalence and impact of pain in adults aging with a physical disability: Comparison to a US general population sample. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 30(4), 307–315.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Little, T. D., Card, N. A., Slegers, D. W., & Ledford, E. C. (2007). Representing contextual effects in multiple-group MACS models. In T. D. Little, J. A. Bovaird, & N. A. Card (Eds.), Modeling contextual effects in longitudinal studies (pp. 121–147). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Little, T. D., Card, N. A., Slegers, D. W., & Ledford, E. C. (2007). Representing contextual effects in multiple-group MACS models. In T. D. Little, J. A. Bovaird, & N. A. Card (Eds.), Modeling contextual effects in longitudinal studies (pp. 121–147). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
go back to reference Widaman, K. F., & Reise, S. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. In K. J. Bryant, M. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention (pp. 281–324). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Widaman, K. F., & Reise, S. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. In K. J. Bryant, M. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention (pp. 281–324). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25.
go back to reference Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2013). Mplus User’s Guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2013). Mplus User’s Guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
26.
go back to reference Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
27.
go back to reference Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. London: Sage. Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. London: Sage.
28.
go back to reference Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Metagegevens
Titel
Testing the measurement invariance of the University of Washington Self-Efficacy Scale short form across four diagnostic subgroups
Auteurs
Hyewon Chung
Jiseon Kim
Ryoungsun Park
Alyssa M. Bamer
Fraser D. Bocell
Dagmar Amtmann
Publicatiedatum
01-10-2016
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 10/2016
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1300-z

Andere artikelen Uitgave 10/2016

Quality of Life Research 10/2016 Naar de uitgave