|
目的:验证家庭环境量表中文版在问题青少年群体的信度和效度。方法:902名12-25岁青少年接受家庭环境量表中文版调查,其中心理障碍222例、违法者290例、正常者390人,用信度分析、因素分析和组间比较验证量表的信度和效度。结果:除情感表达、独立性和宗教观外,其它分量表在三个样本中的信度都在0.5以上,除独立性和控制性外,其它分量表得分组间差异具有显著性(P <0.05);正常青少年样本探索性因素分析获得三因子:关系(亲密度、情感表达、矛盾性、组织性)、个人成长(娱乐性、知识性)、稳定性(成功性、组织性、控制性),累计解释总方差的64.70%,验证性因素分析显示三因素交叉模型的拟合度优于Moos三因素模型和刘丹三因素模型。结论:独立性和宗教观信度很差,娱乐性、成功性和情感表达信度较差,其它分量表的信度符合心理测量学要求,家庭环境量表中文版8个分量表符合三因素交叉模型,对不同人群具有鉴别效度。
|
|
Objective: To examine the reliability and validity of the Family Environment Scale-Chinese Version(FESCV). Methods: The FES-CV was administered to 390 normal adolescents, 290 juvenile delinquents and 222 patients with mental disorder. Results: Except for expressiveness, independence and moral-religious emphasis, the reliabilities of other subscales were above 0.5 in all three samples; except for independence and control, there were significant group differences on other subscales(P <0.05); Exploratory factor analysis of normal adolescent sample obtained three factor: relationship(cohe-sion, expressiveness, conflict, and organization), personal growth(intellectual-cultural orientation and active-recreational orientation), and system maintenance(achievement orientation, organization, and control), which explained total variance of 64.7%. Fit index and incremental index in confirmatory factor analysis supported that the three-factor interaction model was better than the Moos or Liu Dan three-factor model. Conclusion: The reliabilities of the independence and moral-reli-gious orientation are very poor, active-recreational orientation, achievement orientation, and expressiveness are poor, and other subscales meet with psychometric requirements; The findings in this study support a three-factors interaction model for FES-CV.
|
|
1 谢虹,艾宪淮,朱宝俊. 家庭环境与高中生心理健康水平的相关研究.中国行为医学科学,2001,10(5):478-479
2 Henderson CE, Dakof GA, Schwartz SJ, et a1. Family functioning, self-concept and severity of adolescent externalizing problems. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 2006, 15(6):719-729
3 王东宇. 心理健康与家庭环境和中学生学业成绩的关系. 中国健康心理学杂志,2003,11(1):48-50
4 彭阳,周世杰. 青少年网络成瘾与家庭环境、父母教养方式的关系. 中国临床心理学杂志,2007,15(4):418-419,439
5 杨志伟,刘少文,李雪荣. 儿童行为问题、学业成绩与家庭环境的相关模型研究. 中国心理卫生杂志,2000,14(4):263-266
6 费立鹏,沈其杰,郑延平,等“. 家庭亲密度和适应性量表” 和“家庭环境量表”的初步评价——正常家庭与精神分裂症家庭成员对照研究. 中国心理卫生杂志,1991,5(5):198-202,238
7 刘丹,张志坤,傅茂笋,等. 中文版家庭环境量表的因子结构分析. 中国行为医学科学,2008,17(3):277-279
8 邹定辉,周远东,费立鹏. 心理卫生评定量表手册. 增刊. 中国心理卫生杂志,1999. 139-142
9 Moos RH, Moos BS. Family Environment Scale manual. Plao Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1986
10 Usluer S. The reliability and validity of the Turkish family environment questionnaire. Unpublished master thesis. Bosporus University, Istanbul, Turkey, 1989
11 GÖktan B, Akbag M. An investigation on Turkish military school students: Are there associations among big five personality factors, perceived family environment and hopelessness? Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2010, 2(2):5458-5462
12 Vianna VPT, Eroy Aparecida da SM, Lucia OS F.Portuguese version of the Family Environment Scale:Application and validation. Rev Sa de P blica, 2007, 41(1): 1-8
13 Moos RH. Conceptual and empirical approaches to developing family-based assessment procedures: resolving the case of the Family Environment Scale. Family Process, 1990, 29 (2): 199-208
14 Naoki M, Yuji N, Satoru S, et al. Family characteristics and dynamics in Janpan and the United States: a preliminary report from the Family Environment Scale. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1995, 19(1): 59-86
|