811 resultados para Relative Validity
Resumo:
Family cohesion and adaptability, as operationalised in the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scales III (FACES III), are two hypothesised dimensions of family functioning. We tested the properties of a French version of FACES III in school-children (mean age: 13 years; S.D:0.85) recruited from the general population and their parents. Separate confirmatory factor analyses were performed for adolescents and adults. The results of both analyses were compatible with a two-factor structure similar to that proposed by the authors of the original instrument. However, orthogonality between the two factors was only supported in the adult data. Internal reliability estimates were 0.78 and 0.68 in adolescents and 0.82 and 0.65 in adults, for cohesion and adaptability respectively.
Resumo:
A number of concrete admixtures are presently used in various concretes principally for water reduction, retardation, or air entrainment. Whereas the use of these admixtures in concrete placement is well documented, there is limited information showing their effects on durability and drying shrinkage. Since the durability and the shrinkage of concrete can have a pronounce effect on a structures longevity, wear characteristics, and reaction to loading, it is desirable to know the relative effects of different admixtures prior to concrete placement. The purpose of this study is to provide information which could be used to establish durability and shrinkage criterion for evaluating the admixtures currently in use and those whose use may be proposed.
Resumo:
Background: General practitioners play a central role in taking deprivation into consideration when caring for patients in primary care. Validated questions to identify deprivation in primary-care practices are still lacking. For both clinical and research purposes, this study therefore aims to develop and validate a standardized instrument measuring both material and social deprivation at an individual level. Methods: The Deprivation in Primary Care Questionnaire (DiPCare-Q) was developed using qualitative and quantitative approaches between 2008 and 2011. A systematic review identified 199 questions related to deprivation. Using judgmental item quality, these were reduced to 38 questions. Two focus groups (primary-care physicians, and primary-care researchers), structured interviews (10 laymen), and think aloud interviews (eight cleaning staff) assured face validity. Item response theory analysis was then used to derive the DiPCare-Q index using data obtained from a random sample of 200 patients who were to complete the questionnaire a second time over the phone. For construct and criterion validity, the final 16 questions were administered to a random sample of 1,898 patients attending one of 47 different private primary-care practices in western Switzerland (validation set) along with questions on subjective social status (subjective SES ladder), education, source of income, welfare status, and subjective poverty. Results: Deprivation was defined in three distinct dimensions (table); material deprivation (eight items), social deprivation (five items) and health deprivation (three items). Item consistency was high in both the derivation (KR20 = 0.827) and the validation set (KR20 = 0.778). The DiPCare-Q index was reliable (ICC = 0.847). For construct validity, we showed the DiPCare-Q index to be correlated to patients' estimation of their position on the subjective SES ladder (rs = 0.539). This position was correlated to both material and social deprivation independently suggesting two separate mechanisms enhancing the feeling of deprivation. Conclusion: The DiPCare-Q is a rapid, reliable and validated instrument useful for measuring both material and social deprivation in primary care. Questions from the DiPCare-Q are easy to use when investigating patients' social history and could improve clinicians' ability to detect underlying social distress related to deprivation.
Resumo:
When researchers introduce a new test they have to demonstrate that it is valid, using unbiased designs and suitable statistical procedures. In this article we use Monte Carlo analyses to highlight how incorrect statistical procedures (i.e., stepwise regression, extreme scores analyses) or ignoring regression assumptions (e.g., heteroscedasticity) contribute to wrong validity estimates. Beyond these demonstrations, and as an example, we re-examined the results reported by Warwick, Nettelbeck, and Ward (2010) concerning the validity of the Ability Emotional Intelligence Measure (AEIM). Warwick et al. used the wrong statistical procedures to conclude that the AEIM was incrementally valid beyond intelligence and personality traits in predicting various outcomes. In our re-analysis, we found that the reliability-corrected multiple correlation of their measures with personality and intelligence was up to .69. Using robust statistical procedures and appropriate controls, we also found that the AEIM did not predict incremental variance in GPA, stress, loneliness, or well-being, demonstrating the importance for testing validity instead of looking for it.
Resumo:
This study explores the impact of relative size on the intra- and intergroup attitudes of groups who either share a language or have a different language. For that purpose, we examined international attitudes, comparing a small nation, Switzerland, and two larger nations, Germany and France. We found support for the assumption that large neighbouring nations pose a threat to the smaller nation's identity, especially when they are linguistically similar. Consequently, in line with Tajfel's Social Identity Theory (1978), the smaller nation's inhabitants evaluate those of the larger nation less positively, liking them less and perceiving them to be more arrogant than vice versa. By investigating the special case of the French-speaking and the German-speaking Swiss as linguistic groups within their own nation we were able to demonstrate that these groups seek support with the larger-linguistically-similar nation to defend themselves against the more direct in-country threat to their identity. They acknowledge the similarity with the larger nation, yet keep defending their social identity by expressing a dislike for this perceived similarity.
Resumo:
We present the first steps in the validation of an observational tool for father-mother-infant interactions: the FAAS (Family Alliance Assessment Scales). Family-level variables are acknowledged as unique contributors to the understanding of the socio-affective development of the child, yet producing reliable assessments of family-level interactions poses a methodological challenge. There is, therefore, a clear need for a validated and clinically relevant tool. This validation study has been carried out on three samples: one non-referred sample, of families taking part in a study on the transition to parenthood (normative sample; n = 30), one referred for medically assisted procreation (infertility sample; n = 30) and one referred for a psychiatric condition in one parent (clinical sample; n = 15). Results show that the FAAS scales have (1) good inter-rater reliability and (2) good validity, as assessed through known-group validity by comparing the three samples and through concurrent validity by checking family interactions against parents' self-reported marital satisfaction.