PID-5-SRF online administration: psychometric indicators and measurement invariance between different formats of data collection.

IF 2.1 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Ana Maria Barchi-Ferreira, Flavia Osório
{"title":"PID-5-SRF online administration: psychometric indicators and measurement invariance between different formats of data collection.","authors":"Ana Maria Barchi-Ferreira, Flavia Osório","doi":"10.47626/2237-6089-2023-0711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The PID-5 is a tool used to assess maladaptive personality traits according to the DSM-5 Alternative Model. Objective: The objective is to seek evidence of the validity and reliability of the Personality Inventory for DMS-5 (PID-5-SRF) admin-istered online and assess its measurement invariance compared to the paper-and-pencil administration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of 274 individuals from the general population (73.4% of women; 34.76 years old ±11.6) completed the instrument online after the study was dissemi-nated on social media and among the authors' contacts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Internal consistency (facets α≥0.70; domains α≥0.89) and test-retest reliability (15 to 30 days: facets ICC≥0.63; domains ICC≥0.82) were satisfactory, but a floor effect was found in almost all the items. A large number of facets (N=9) showed better fit to a bifactorial structure, and the Exploratory Factor Analysis suggested that a six-factor model better fits the data. Measurement invariance between the online and paper-and-pencil administrations was not attested at a configural level.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results revealed satisfactory psychometric indicators when the instrument was applied online, confirming its feasibility in collecting data. However, the in-strument's structure is not invariant, and caution must be adopted when compar-ing and interpreting data collected through different formats.</p>","PeriodicalId":46305,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47626/2237-6089-2023-0711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The PID-5 is a tool used to assess maladaptive personality traits according to the DSM-5 Alternative Model. Objective: The objective is to seek evidence of the validity and reliability of the Personality Inventory for DMS-5 (PID-5-SRF) admin-istered online and assess its measurement invariance compared to the paper-and-pencil administration.

Methods: A sample of 274 individuals from the general population (73.4% of women; 34.76 years old ±11.6) completed the instrument online after the study was dissemi-nated on social media and among the authors' contacts.

Results: Internal consistency (facets α≥0.70; domains α≥0.89) and test-retest reliability (15 to 30 days: facets ICC≥0.63; domains ICC≥0.82) were satisfactory, but a floor effect was found in almost all the items. A large number of facets (N=9) showed better fit to a bifactorial structure, and the Exploratory Factor Analysis suggested that a six-factor model better fits the data. Measurement invariance between the online and paper-and-pencil administrations was not attested at a configural level.

Conclusion: The results revealed satisfactory psychometric indicators when the instrument was applied online, confirming its feasibility in collecting data. However, the in-strument's structure is not invariant, and caution must be adopted when compar-ing and interpreting data collected through different formats.

PID-5-SRF 在线管理:不同数据收集格式之间的心理测量指标和测量不变性。
简介PID-5 是根据 DSM-5 替代模型评估适应不良人格特质的工具。研究目的目的:旨在寻求 DMS-5 人格问卷(PID-5-SRF)在线施测的有效性和可靠性的证据,并评估其与纸笔施测相比的测量不变性:方法:在社交媒体和作者的联系人中传播该研究后,274 名普通人群(73.4% 为女性;34.76 岁 ±11.6)完成了在线问卷调查:内部一致性(面α≥0.70;域α≥0.89)和重测可靠性(15 至 30 天:面 ICC≥0.63;域 ICC≥0.82)令人满意,但几乎所有项目都存在底线效应。大量面(N=9)显示出与双因子结构更好的拟合,探索性因子分析表明六因子模型更适合数据。在线施测和纸笔施测之间的测量不变性没有在配置水平上得到证实:结果显示,在线问卷的心理测量指标令人满意,证实了其在收集数据方面的可行性。结论:结果表明,在线问卷的心理测量指标令人满意,证实了其在收集数据方面的可行性,但在线问卷的结构并不不变,在比较和解释通过不同形式收集的数据时必须谨慎。
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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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