心理安全感神经量表(NPSS)的因子结构、结构效度和测量不变性。

IF 3 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Marta Spinoni, Andrea Zagaria, Anna Pecchinenda, Caterina Grano
{"title":"心理安全感神经量表(NPSS)的因子结构、结构效度和测量不变性。","authors":"Marta Spinoni, Andrea Zagaria, Anna Pecchinenda, Caterina Grano","doi":"10.3390/ejihpe14100178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Psychological safety has recently emerged as a central construct, strictly implicated in mental health and emotional well-being. The Neuroception of Psychological Safety Scale (NPSS) is the first scale designed to assess feelings of psychological safety from a multidimensional perspective. However, the robustness of its factorial structure requires further examination in large community samples, and evidence of construct validity along with measurement invariance across genders is scarce. The present study aimed to address these gaps through a comprehensive cross-validation approach. A community sample of 660 Italian adults, aged 18-65, completed self-report questionnaires including the NPSS, the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scale (CEAS), the Sussex-Oxford Compassion for Others (SOCS), and the Body Perception Questionnaire (BPQ). A three-factor model, i.e., <i>Social Engagement</i>, <i>Compassion</i>, and <i>Bodily Sensations</i>, demonstrated a good fit to the data in two random subsamples. Moreover, the measurement model was factorially invariant across genders. Model-based omega coefficients supported the internal consistency of the NPSS scores (ω ranged between 0.879 and 0.918). Zero-order correlations between NPSS subscales and CEAS, SOCS, and BPQ provided construct validity evidence. Additionally, inter-correlations between latent factors and Harman's single-factor test supported the discriminant validity of the NPSS dimensions. Overall, this study provided compelling evidence regarding the psychometric properties of the NPSS, demonstrating for the first time the invariance of its factorial structure across gender.</p>","PeriodicalId":30631,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education","volume":"14 10","pages":"2702-2715"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11507099/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factor Structure, Construct Validity, and Measurement Invariance of the Neuroception of Psychological Safety Scale (NPSS).\",\"authors\":\"Marta Spinoni, Andrea Zagaria, Anna Pecchinenda, Caterina Grano\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/ejihpe14100178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Psychological safety has recently emerged as a central construct, strictly implicated in mental health and emotional well-being. The Neuroception of Psychological Safety Scale (NPSS) is the first scale designed to assess feelings of psychological safety from a multidimensional perspective. However, the robustness of its factorial structure requires further examination in large community samples, and evidence of construct validity along with measurement invariance across genders is scarce. The present study aimed to address these gaps through a comprehensive cross-validation approach. A community sample of 660 Italian adults, aged 18-65, completed self-report questionnaires including the NPSS, the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scale (CEAS), the Sussex-Oxford Compassion for Others (SOCS), and the Body Perception Questionnaire (BPQ). A three-factor model, i.e., <i>Social Engagement</i>, <i>Compassion</i>, and <i>Bodily Sensations</i>, demonstrated a good fit to the data in two random subsamples. Moreover, the measurement model was factorially invariant across genders. Model-based omega coefficients supported the internal consistency of the NPSS scores (ω ranged between 0.879 and 0.918). Zero-order correlations between NPSS subscales and CEAS, SOCS, and BPQ provided construct validity evidence. Additionally, inter-correlations between latent factors and Harman's single-factor test supported the discriminant validity of the NPSS dimensions. Overall, this study provided compelling evidence regarding the psychometric properties of the NPSS, demonstrating for the first time the invariance of its factorial structure across gender.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":30631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education\",\"volume\":\"14 10\",\"pages\":\"2702-2715\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11507099/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe14100178\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe14100178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

心理安全是最近出现的一个核心概念,与心理健康和情感幸福密切相关。心理安全感神经量表(NPSS)是第一个从多维角度评估心理安全感的量表。然而,该量表的因子结构的稳健性还需要在大型社区样本中进行进一步的检验,而且其结构效度和跨性别测量不变性的证据也很少。本研究旨在通过全面的交叉验证方法来弥补这些不足。660 名年龄在 18-65 岁之间的意大利成年人在社区样本中填写了自我报告问卷,包括 NPSS、同情心参与和行动量表(CEAS)、苏塞克斯-牛津他人同情心量表(SOCS)和身体感知问卷(BPQ)。在两个随机子样本中,一个三因素模型(即社会参与、同情心和身体感觉)与数据拟合良好。此外,该测量模型在不同性别间具有因子不变性。基于模型的欧米茄系数支持 NPSS 分数的内部一致性(ω介于 0.879 和 0.918 之间)。NPSS 各分量表与 CEAS、SOCS 和 BPQ 之间的零阶相关性提供了建构效度证据。此外,潜在因子之间的相互关系和哈曼单因子检验也支持了 NPSS 各维度的区分效度。总之,本研究为 NPSS 的心理测量特性提供了令人信服的证据,首次证明了其因子结构在不同性别间的不变性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Factor Structure, Construct Validity, and Measurement Invariance of the Neuroception of Psychological Safety Scale (NPSS).

Psychological safety has recently emerged as a central construct, strictly implicated in mental health and emotional well-being. The Neuroception of Psychological Safety Scale (NPSS) is the first scale designed to assess feelings of psychological safety from a multidimensional perspective. However, the robustness of its factorial structure requires further examination in large community samples, and evidence of construct validity along with measurement invariance across genders is scarce. The present study aimed to address these gaps through a comprehensive cross-validation approach. A community sample of 660 Italian adults, aged 18-65, completed self-report questionnaires including the NPSS, the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scale (CEAS), the Sussex-Oxford Compassion for Others (SOCS), and the Body Perception Questionnaire (BPQ). A three-factor model, i.e., Social Engagement, Compassion, and Bodily Sensations, demonstrated a good fit to the data in two random subsamples. Moreover, the measurement model was factorially invariant across genders. Model-based omega coefficients supported the internal consistency of the NPSS scores (ω ranged between 0.879 and 0.918). Zero-order correlations between NPSS subscales and CEAS, SOCS, and BPQ provided construct validity evidence. Additionally, inter-correlations between latent factors and Harman's single-factor test supported the discriminant validity of the NPSS dimensions. Overall, this study provided compelling evidence regarding the psychometric properties of the NPSS, demonstrating for the first time the invariance of its factorial structure across gender.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
111
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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