Is Less More? Reevaluating the Psychometric Properties of the Sense of Coherence-13 and a Revised Seven-Item Version in South Africa Using Classical Theory and Item Response Theory

Psych Pub Date : 2023-09-28 DOI:10.3390/psych5040069
Tyrone B. Pretorius, Anita Padmanabhanunni
{"title":"Is Less More? Reevaluating the Psychometric Properties of the Sense of Coherence-13 and a Revised Seven-Item Version in South Africa Using Classical Theory and Item Response Theory","authors":"Tyrone B. Pretorius, Anita Padmanabhanunni","doi":"10.3390/psych5040069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Studies on the dimensionality and factor structure of the Sense of Coherence-13 (SOC-13) scale have produced inconsistent results, and there is a need for comprehensive psychometric testing of the scale in different populations and using diverse methodologies. SOC refers to the individual’s ability to perceive life as comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful. The current study investigated the dimensionality of the SOC-13 through the use of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), ancillary bifactor indices and item response theory in a sample of young adults in South Africa. Participants were students (n = 322) who completed the SOC-13, the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale, the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 and short forms of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, and the trait scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. CFA indicated the best fit for a one-factor model, but the problematic parameter estimates raise concerns about the construct validity of the scale. Non-parametric item response theory (Mokken scale analysis [MSA]) identified limitations in the original 13-item version, suggesting a more dependable seven-item version (SOC-7). This revised scale exhibited strong psychometric characteristics and was consistent with the theoretical foundations that underpin the construct. We verified the unidimensional structure of the SOC with the more stringent parametric item-response theory (Rasch analysis) which confirmed that the seven-item SOC is unidimensional. Rasch analysis confirmed the measurement invariance of the SOC-13 in terms of gender and area of residence. The study suggests that a shorter seven-item version consisting of items from the three components of sense of coherence has comparative properties to the 13-item version but the evidence does not provide support for the use of the SOC-13 as a multidimensional measure. Research in the area of sense of coherence would benefit from further validation studies of both the original SOC-13 and the revised SOC-7, especially across populations and settings.","PeriodicalId":93139,"journal":{"name":"Psych","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5040069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Studies on the dimensionality and factor structure of the Sense of Coherence-13 (SOC-13) scale have produced inconsistent results, and there is a need for comprehensive psychometric testing of the scale in different populations and using diverse methodologies. SOC refers to the individual’s ability to perceive life as comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful. The current study investigated the dimensionality of the SOC-13 through the use of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), ancillary bifactor indices and item response theory in a sample of young adults in South Africa. Participants were students (n = 322) who completed the SOC-13, the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale, the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 and short forms of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, and the trait scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. CFA indicated the best fit for a one-factor model, but the problematic parameter estimates raise concerns about the construct validity of the scale. Non-parametric item response theory (Mokken scale analysis [MSA]) identified limitations in the original 13-item version, suggesting a more dependable seven-item version (SOC-7). This revised scale exhibited strong psychometric characteristics and was consistent with the theoretical foundations that underpin the construct. We verified the unidimensional structure of the SOC with the more stringent parametric item-response theory (Rasch analysis) which confirmed that the seven-item SOC is unidimensional. Rasch analysis confirmed the measurement invariance of the SOC-13 in terms of gender and area of residence. The study suggests that a shorter seven-item version consisting of items from the three components of sense of coherence has comparative properties to the 13-item version but the evidence does not provide support for the use of the SOC-13 as a multidimensional measure. Research in the area of sense of coherence would benefit from further validation studies of both the original SOC-13 and the revised SOC-7, especially across populations and settings.
少就是多?用经典理论和项目反应理论重新评价连贯感的心理测量特性-13和南非修订的七项版本
对连贯性-13 (SOC-13)量表的维度和因素结构的研究结果并不一致,需要在不同人群中使用不同的方法对该量表进行综合的心理测量测试。SOC指的是个体将生活视为可理解、可管理和有意义的能力。本研究通过验证性因子分析(CFA)、辅助双因子指数和项目反应理论,对南非年轻人的SOC-13维度进行了调查。参与者为322名学生,他们完成了SOC-13、Connor-Davidson弹性量表、DSM-5的PTSD检查表和流行病学研究中心抑郁量表的简短形式,以及Spielberger状态-特质焦虑量表的特质量表。CFA表明单因素模型最适合,但有问题的参数估计引起了对量表构造有效性的关注。非参数项目反应理论(Mokken量表分析[MSA])发现了最初的13个项目版本的局限性,建议采用更可靠的7个项目版本(SOC-7)。修订后的量表表现出强烈的心理测量特征,与支撑该结构的理论基础一致。我们用更严格的参数项目反应理论(Rasch分析)验证了SOC的单维结构,证实了7项SOC是单维的。Rasch分析证实了SOC-13在性别和居住地区方面的测量不变性。研究表明,由连贯感的三个组成部分组成的短小的七项版本与13项版本具有可比性,但证据不支持将SOC-13作为多维测量。连贯性感领域的研究将受益于对最初的社会行为准则第13号和订正的社会行为准则第7号的进一步验证研究,特别是跨人群和跨环境的验证研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信