Josephine R. Granner , Clayton J. Shuman , Asa B. Smith , Elizabeth E. Umberfield , Ellen M.L. Smith
{"title":"Psychometric evaluation of the Collaboration for Leadership and Innovation in Mentoring survey: An instrument of PhD student mentorship quality","authors":"Josephine R. Granner , Clayton J. Shuman , Asa B. Smith , Elizabeth E. Umberfield , Ellen M.L. Smith","doi":"10.1016/j.nedt.2025.106794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Quality mentorship plays a crucial role in shaping the intellectual and professional growth of PhD students and is therefore a pivotal component of their education. Despite the recognized importance of mentorship, few rigorously validated instruments exist to measure the multifaceted dimensions of mentorship quality. Our Collaboration for Leadership and Innovation in Mentoring (CLIM) survey, which comprehensively assesses PhD mentorship quality, was previously developed in a nursing student population yet has not been robustly validated.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to conduct a psychometric evaluation of the CLIM Survey including 1) reducing the number of items and 2) identifying dimensions and testing reliability and validity in a diverse PhD student sample.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>This was cross sectional instrument development and validation study.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>A total of 819 PhD students representing 19 departments at a large public university.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We administered the 44-item CLIM instrument via anonymous surveys. To reduce the number of items and assess structural validity, we used principal component analysis (PCA). We included components with eigenvalues >1.0 and items with component loadings >0.3 on one component. The instrument was reduced to 22 items across 6 components: 1) Working Together, 2) Mentor Availability, 3) Mentoring Teams and Goals, 4) Shared Research Interests, 5) Mutual Respect, and 6) Mentor Benefit.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Strong internal consistency reliability of the resulting instrument (CLIM-22) was demonstrated by an α = 0.89; total scores ranged from 15 to 110 (<em>mean</em> = 81.57; <em>SD</em> = 15.42), with higher scores indicating higher mentorship quality.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These results support the reliability and validity of the new CLIM-22 instrument, offering a standardized tool to assess PhD mentorship experiences. Effectively measuring the quality of mentor-mentee relationships in PhD programs should be integrated with targeted interventions to enhance doctoral education, student experiences, and mentor-mentee relationships.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54704,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Education Today","volume":"153 ","pages":"Article 106794"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Education Today","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0260691725002308","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Quality mentorship plays a crucial role in shaping the intellectual and professional growth of PhD students and is therefore a pivotal component of their education. Despite the recognized importance of mentorship, few rigorously validated instruments exist to measure the multifaceted dimensions of mentorship quality. Our Collaboration for Leadership and Innovation in Mentoring (CLIM) survey, which comprehensively assesses PhD mentorship quality, was previously developed in a nursing student population yet has not been robustly validated.
Objectives
The purpose of this study was to conduct a psychometric evaluation of the CLIM Survey including 1) reducing the number of items and 2) identifying dimensions and testing reliability and validity in a diverse PhD student sample.
Design
This was cross sectional instrument development and validation study.
Participants
A total of 819 PhD students representing 19 departments at a large public university.
Methods
We administered the 44-item CLIM instrument via anonymous surveys. To reduce the number of items and assess structural validity, we used principal component analysis (PCA). We included components with eigenvalues >1.0 and items with component loadings >0.3 on one component. The instrument was reduced to 22 items across 6 components: 1) Working Together, 2) Mentor Availability, 3) Mentoring Teams and Goals, 4) Shared Research Interests, 5) Mutual Respect, and 6) Mentor Benefit.
Results
Strong internal consistency reliability of the resulting instrument (CLIM-22) was demonstrated by an α = 0.89; total scores ranged from 15 to 110 (mean = 81.57; SD = 15.42), with higher scores indicating higher mentorship quality.
Conclusions
These results support the reliability and validity of the new CLIM-22 instrument, offering a standardized tool to assess PhD mentorship experiences. Effectively measuring the quality of mentor-mentee relationships in PhD programs should be integrated with targeted interventions to enhance doctoral education, student experiences, and mentor-mentee relationships.
期刊介绍:
Nurse Education Today is the leading international journal providing a forum for the publication of high quality original research, review and debate in the discussion of nursing, midwifery and interprofessional health care education, publishing papers which contribute to the advancement of educational theory and pedagogy that support the evidence-based practice for educationalists worldwide. The journal stimulates and values critical scholarly debate on issues that have strategic relevance for leaders of health care education.
The journal publishes the highest quality scholarly contributions reflecting the diversity of people, health and education systems worldwide, by publishing research that employs rigorous methodology as well as by publishing papers that highlight the theoretical underpinnings of education and systems globally. The journal will publish papers that show depth, rigour, originality and high standards of presentation, in particular, work that is original, analytical and constructively critical of both previous work and current initiatives.
Authors are invited to submit original research, systematic and scholarly reviews, and critical papers which will stimulate debate on research, policy, theory or philosophy of nursing and related health care education, and which will meet and develop the journal''s high academic and ethical standards.