Confirmatory factor analysis and psychometric properties of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index-Revised in clinical and normative populations

The present investigation aimed to critically examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index - Revised (ASI-R). Confirmatory factor analysis using a clinical sample of adults (N = 248) revealed that the ASI-R could be improved substantially through the removal of 15 problematic items in order to account for the most robust dimensions of anxiety sensitivity. This modified scale was renamed the 21-item Anxiety Sensitivity Index (21-item ASI) and reanalyzed with a large sample of normative adults (N = 435), revealing configural and metric invariance across groups. Further comparisons with other alternative models, using multi-sample analysis, indicated the 21-item ASI to be the best fitting model for both groups. There was also evidence of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity for both samples suggesting that the 21-item ASI is a useful assessment device for investigating the construct of anxiety sensitivity in both clinical and normative populations.

Evaluating the properties of a stage-specific self-efficacy scale for physical activity using classical test theory, confirmatory factor analysis and item response modeling

The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the psychometric properties of a stage-specific selfefficacy scale for physical activity with classical test theory (CTT), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response modeling (IRM). Women who enrolled in the Women On The Move study completed a 20-item stage-specific self-efficacy scale developed for this study [n = 226, 51.1% African-American and 48.9% Hispanic women, mean age = 49.2 (67.0) years, mean body mass index = 29.7 (66.4)]. Three analyses were conducted: (i) a CTT item analysis, (ii) a CFA to validate the factor structure and (iii) an IRM analysis. The CTT item analysis and the CFA results showed that the scale had high internal consistency (ranging from 0.76 to 0.93) and a strong factor structure. Results also showed that the scale could be improved by modifying or eliminating some of the existing items without significantly altering the content of the scale. The IRM results also showed that the scale had few items that targeted high self-efficacy and the stage-specific assumption underlying the scale was rejected. In addition, the IRM analyses found that the five-point response format functioned more like a four-point response format. Overall, employing multiple methods to assess the psychometric properties of the stage-specific self-efficacy scale demonstrated the complimentary nature of these methods and it highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of this scale.