Measurement Structure and Regional Invariance of the Demographic and Health Survey Intimate Partner Violence Items: A Comparative Confirmatory Factor Analysis.
Irina Bergenfeld, Cari Jo Clark, Angela M Bengtson, Regine Haardörfer
{"title":"Measurement Structure and Regional Invariance of the Demographic and Health Survey Intimate Partner Violence Items: A Comparative Confirmatory Factor Analysis.","authors":"Irina Bergenfeld, Cari Jo Clark, Angela M Bengtson, Regine Haardörfer","doi":"10.1177/10731911251340847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a pressing international issue affecting more than a third of women in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, accurate global assessment of IPV prevalence among women in LMICs is limited by a lack of consensus around the domains of IPV and sparse evidence on cross-country comparability. We assessed the measurement structure and regional invariance of scales used in population-based surveys to measure IPV (physical, sexual, and emotional) and controlling behaviors. Using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), we tested unidimensional, multifactorial, hierarchical, bifactor, and bifactor S-1 models for lifetime and past-year IPV across 46 LMICs. We then assessed the invariance of the best-fitting models across countries within world regions using multiple-group CFA. Although other models also showed good fit in most countries, bifactor/bifactor S-1 models had the best fit across all countries and were invariant within most regions. Most bifactor models, especially without controlling behaviors, were primarily unidimensional; IPV can therefore be conceptualized as a single construct with nuanced facets. Researchers seeking to model IPV should consider the bifactor/bifactor S-1 model, unidimensional model, or simple summative measures incorporating physical, sexual, and emotional domains.</p>","PeriodicalId":8577,"journal":{"name":"Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"10731911251340847"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12354333/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911251340847","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a pressing international issue affecting more than a third of women in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, accurate global assessment of IPV prevalence among women in LMICs is limited by a lack of consensus around the domains of IPV and sparse evidence on cross-country comparability. We assessed the measurement structure and regional invariance of scales used in population-based surveys to measure IPV (physical, sexual, and emotional) and controlling behaviors. Using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), we tested unidimensional, multifactorial, hierarchical, bifactor, and bifactor S-1 models for lifetime and past-year IPV across 46 LMICs. We then assessed the invariance of the best-fitting models across countries within world regions using multiple-group CFA. Although other models also showed good fit in most countries, bifactor/bifactor S-1 models had the best fit across all countries and were invariant within most regions. Most bifactor models, especially without controlling behaviors, were primarily unidimensional; IPV can therefore be conceptualized as a single construct with nuanced facets. Researchers seeking to model IPV should consider the bifactor/bifactor S-1 model, unidimensional model, or simple summative measures incorporating physical, sexual, and emotional domains.
期刊介绍:
Assessment publishes articles in the domain of applied clinical assessment. The emphasis of this journal is on publication of information of relevance to the use of assessment measures, including test development, validation, and interpretation practices. The scope of the journal includes research that can inform assessment practices in mental health, forensic, medical, and other applied settings. Papers that focus on the assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological functioning, personality, and psychopathology are invited. Most papers published in Assessment report the results of original empirical research, however integrative review articles and scholarly case studies will also be considered.