Validity and Reliability of the Simplified Chinese Version of the Purdue Pegboard Test.

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Yin Sin Poo, Siaw Chui Chai, Poh Im Goh, Masne Kadar, Nor Afifi Razaob Razab
{"title":"Validity and Reliability of the Simplified Chinese Version of the Purdue Pegboard Test.","authors":"Yin Sin Poo, Siaw Chui Chai, Poh Im Goh, Masne Kadar, Nor Afifi Razaob Razab","doi":"10.1177/00315125251338656","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Administration of Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT) for fine motor testing among individuals with limited English comprehension is challenging. Translation of PPT into different language versions for use among individuals who speak other languages is crucial for examiner-examinee interactions. This study aimed to translate the PPT from English into Simplified Chinese (PPT-C) and evaluate the PPT-C linguistic content validity and test-retest reliability. Four English language teachers performed PPT's forward and backward translations (Model 32020A) into PPT-C. Ten expert reviewers evaluated the linguistic content validity and 60 university students (1-trial administration (<i>n</i> = 30) and 3-trial administration (<i>n</i> = 30)) participated in the test-retest reliability evaluation. PPT-C showed excellent content validity with Item-Content Validity Index = 0.80 - 1.00, Scale-Content Validity Index/Average = 0.93 - 1.00, and Scale-Content Validity Index/Universal Agreement = 0.25 - 1.00. The 3-trial administration had higher test-retest reliability (moderate to good) with intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) (standard error of measurements (SEMs)) = 0.69 (SEM = 0.88) - 0.81 (SEM = 0.69) compared to 1-trial administration (poor to moderate) with ICCs = 0.33 (SEM = 1.34) - 0.50 (SEM = 1.10). Both 1-trial and 3-trial administrations were likely to be affected by systematic errors, especially practice effects, as they had higher retest scores. Random errors were minimal; all subtests had minimal detectable change percent values within the acceptable range (15.36%-28.36%). Linguistic content validity and test-retest reliability evaluation showed that PPT-C can be used among Chinese-speaking individuals. It is recommended to use 3-trial administration for more reliable evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19869,"journal":{"name":"Perceptual and Motor Skills","volume":" ","pages":"315125251338656"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perceptual and Motor Skills","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00315125251338656","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Administration of Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT) for fine motor testing among individuals with limited English comprehension is challenging. Translation of PPT into different language versions for use among individuals who speak other languages is crucial for examiner-examinee interactions. This study aimed to translate the PPT from English into Simplified Chinese (PPT-C) and evaluate the PPT-C linguistic content validity and test-retest reliability. Four English language teachers performed PPT's forward and backward translations (Model 32020A) into PPT-C. Ten expert reviewers evaluated the linguistic content validity and 60 university students (1-trial administration (n = 30) and 3-trial administration (n = 30)) participated in the test-retest reliability evaluation. PPT-C showed excellent content validity with Item-Content Validity Index = 0.80 - 1.00, Scale-Content Validity Index/Average = 0.93 - 1.00, and Scale-Content Validity Index/Universal Agreement = 0.25 - 1.00. The 3-trial administration had higher test-retest reliability (moderate to good) with intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) (standard error of measurements (SEMs)) = 0.69 (SEM = 0.88) - 0.81 (SEM = 0.69) compared to 1-trial administration (poor to moderate) with ICCs = 0.33 (SEM = 1.34) - 0.50 (SEM = 1.10). Both 1-trial and 3-trial administrations were likely to be affected by systematic errors, especially practice effects, as they had higher retest scores. Random errors were minimal; all subtests had minimal detectable change percent values within the acceptable range (15.36%-28.36%). Linguistic content validity and test-retest reliability evaluation showed that PPT-C can be used among Chinese-speaking individuals. It is recommended to use 3-trial administration for more reliable evaluation.

简体中文版普渡钉板测验的效度与信度。
普渡钉板测试(PPT)对英语理解能力有限的个体进行精细运动测试具有挑战性。将PPT翻译成不同的语言版本,以供讲其他语言的人使用,对于考官和考生之间的互动至关重要。本研究旨在将英文PPT翻译成简体中文(PPT- c),并评估PPT- c语言内容效度和重测信度。4位英语教师将PPT (32020A型)前后翻译成PPT- c。语言内容效度评估由10名专家评审,60名大学生(1试组(n = 30)和3试组(n = 30))参与了重测信度评估。PPT-C的项目-内容效度指数为0.80 ~ 1.00,量表-内容效度指数/平均值为0.93 ~ 1.00,量表-内容效度指数/普遍一致性为0.25 ~ 1.00。3个试验给药组具有较高的重测信度(中等至良好),类内相关系数(测量标准误差(SEM)) = 0.69 (SEM = 0.88) - 0.81 (SEM = 0.69),而1个试验给药组(差至中等)的ICCs = 0.33 (SEM = 1.34) - 0.50 (SEM = 1.10)。1-试验和3-试验给药都可能受到系统错误的影响,特别是练习效应,因为它们有更高的复试分数。随机误差最小;所有子测试在可接受范围内(15.36%-28.36%)具有最小可检测的变化百分比值。语言内容效度和重测信度评价结果表明,PPT-C量表在汉语个体中是可行的。建议采用3个试验给药,以获得更可靠的评价。
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
Perceptual and Motor Skills
Perceptual and Motor Skills PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
110
×
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