Stereotypes About Childfree Adults (SAChA)

IF 3.2 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED

European Journal of Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2024-04-02 DOI:10.1027/1015-5759/a000827

J. Neal, Z. Neal

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Childfree adults do not have or want children and voluntarily opt out of parenthood. Although this group is large (more than one-fifth of some adult populations), its members are often subjected to negative stereotypes about their behavior, obligations, personal characteristics, and future outcomes. These negative stereotypes are important because they have implications for childfree adults’ stigmatization. To help measure individuals’ stereotyped views of childfree adults, we use data on a representative sample of 1,000 Michigan adults to develop and validate the Stereotypes about Childfree Adults (SAChA) scale. We demonstrate that this four-item scale exhibits (1) high internal consistency, (2) scalar invariance with respect to sex, race/ethnicity, and education, and (3) known groups, convergent, and discriminant validity. We conclude by discussing potential applications of this scale for understanding stereotypes of individuals’ reproductive decisions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

对无子女成年人的成见 (SAChA)

摘要：无子女成年人不生育或不想要孩子，自愿选择不为人父母。虽然这一群体人数众多（占某些成年人口的五分之一以上），但其成员的行为、义务、个人特征和未来结果却常常受到负面的刻板印象的影响。这些负面的刻板印象很重要，因为它们对无子女成年人的污名化有影响。为了帮助测量个人对无子女成年人的刻板印象，我们使用了密歇根州1000名成年人的代表性样本数据，开发并验证了无子女成年人刻板印象量表（SAChA）。我们证明，这个由四个项目组成的量表表现出：（1）高度的内部一致性；（2）与性别、种族/民族和教育程度相关的标度不变性；（3）已知的群体、收敛性和辨别有效性。最后，我们讨论了该量表在理解个人生育决定刻板印象方面的潜在应用。

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

European Journal of Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED-

CiteScore

6.40

自引率

4.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.