师徒调查中领导协作与创新的心理测量评估：博士生师徒质量的测量工具

IF 4.2 2区医学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES

Nurse Education Today Pub Date : 2025-05-31 DOI:10.1016/j.nedt.2025.106794

Josephine R. Granner , Clayton J. Shuman , Asa B. Smith , Elizabeth E. Umberfield , Ellen M.L. Smith

{"title":"师徒调查中领导协作与创新的心理测量评估：博士生师徒质量的测量工具","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

高质量的指导在塑造博士生的智力和专业成长方面起着至关重要的作用，因此是他们教育的关键组成部分。尽管人们认识到师徒关系的重要性，但很少有经过严格验证的工具来衡量师徒关系质量的多方面。我们的指导领导力和创新合作（CLIM）调查，全面评估博士指导质量，之前在护理学生群体中开发，但尚未得到有力验证。本研究的目的是对CLIM调查进行心理测量评估，包括：1)减少项目数量；2)在不同的博士生样本中确定维度并测试信度和效度。设计本研究为横断面仪器研制及验证研究。参与者：一所大型公立大学共819名博士生，代表19个系。方法采用不记名问卷调查的方式，对共44项的CLIM量表进行问卷调查。为了减少项目数量和评估结构效度，我们使用主成分分析（PCA）。我们在一个组件上包含特征值为>；1.0的组件和组件加载值为>；0.3的组件。该量表被缩减为22项，涵盖6个组成部分：1)共同工作，2)导师可用性，3)指导团队和目标，4)共同研究兴趣，5)相互尊重，6)导师利益。结果CLIM-22具有较强的内部一致性信度（α = 0.89）；总分15 ~ 110分(平均81.57分；SD = 15.42)，得分越高，师徒质量越高。这些结果支持了新的clim22仪器的信度和效度，为评估博士导师经历提供了一个标准化的工具。有效地衡量博士项目中师徒关系的质量应该与有针对性的干预措施相结合，以提高博士教育、学生体验和师徒关系。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Psychometric evaluation of the Collaboration for Leadership and Innovation in Mentoring survey: An instrument of PhD student mentorship quality

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.

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

Nurse Education Today 医学-护理

CiteScore

6.90

自引率

12.80%

发文量

349

审稿时长

58 days

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.