• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

日本人群中父母教养方式问卷的验证性因素分析。

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Parental Bonding Instrument in a Japanese population.

作者信息

Sato T, Narita T, Hirano S, Kusunoki K, Sakado K, Uehara T

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake City, Aichi-ken, Japan.

出版信息

Psychol Med. 1999 Jan;29(1):127-33. doi: 10.1017/s003329179800779x.

DOI:10.1017/s003329179800779x
PMID:10077301
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is controversy surrounding the factor structure of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI), a widely used instrument for assessing perceived parental rearing behaviours. Recent studies have proposed five different factor structures, including Parker et al.'s original two-factor model.

METHODS

Four hundred and eighteen employed Japanese adults filled out the PBI. Maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analyses were performed to compare the five different factor structures in terms of model-fit.

RESULTS

Parker's original two-factor structure fitted the data poorly. In general, three-factor structures showed better fit. Among the three-factor structures, Murphy's model and Kendler's model were superior (the adjusted goodness-of-fit index > 0.8), with the latter providing the best fit to the data (the goodness-of-fit index > 0.9). When considering invariance of factor structure across gender subgroups and across age subgroups, only Kendler's model was acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

Parker's two-factor structure of the PBI may not be appropriate for assessing perceived parental rearing behaviours in a Japanese population. Three-factor structures, in particular Murphy's model and Kendler's model, are preferable. Kendler's model provided the best fit to the data and was relatively invariant across the subgroups in this study. Thus, Kendler's model might prove to be very important for obtaining a factor structure invariant across different cultures.

摘要

背景

用于评估感知到的父母养育行为的广泛使用的工具——父母教养方式问卷(PBI)的因子结构存在争议。最近的研究提出了五种不同的因子结构,包括帕克等人最初的两因素模型。

方法

418名在职日本成年人填写了PBI。进行了最大似然验证性因子分析,以比较五种不同因子结构的模型拟合情况。

结果

帕克最初的两因素结构对数据的拟合较差。一般来说,三因素结构显示出更好的拟合。在三因素结构中,墨菲模型和肯德勒模型表现更优(调整拟合优度指数>0.8),其中肯德勒模型对数据的拟合最佳(拟合优度指数>0.9)。当考虑因子结构在性别亚组和年龄亚组间的不变性时,只有肯德勒模型是可接受的。

结论

PBI的帕克两因素结构可能不适用于评估日本人群中感知到的父母养育行为。三因素结构,特别是墨菲模型和肯德勒模型,更可取。肯德勒模型对数据的拟合最佳,且在本研究的亚组中相对不变。因此,肯德勒模型可能对获得跨不同文化不变的因子结构非常重要。

相似文献

1
Confirmatory factor analysis of the Parental Bonding Instrument in a Japanese population.日本人群中父母教养方式问卷的验证性因素分析。
Psychol Med. 1999 Jan;29(1):127-33. doi: 10.1017/s003329179800779x.
2
Confirmatory factor analysis of the Parental Bonding Instrument in a Brazilian female population.巴西女性群体中父母教养方式问卷的验证性因素分析
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2009 Apr;43(4):348-54. doi: 10.1080/00048670902721053.
3
Can parental bonding be assessed in children? Factor structure and factorial invariance of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) between adults and children.父母联结能否在儿童中进行评估?成人与儿童之间父母教养方式问卷(PBI)的因子结构和因子不变性。
Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2012 Apr;43(2):238-53. doi: 10.1007/s10578-011-0260-3.
4
Depression in young adolescents: investigations using 2 and 3 factor versions of the Parental Bonding Instrument.青少年抑郁症:使用父母教养方式问卷二因素和三因素版本的调查
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2004 Oct;192(10):650-7. doi: 10.1097/01.nmd.0000142028.10056.c6.
5
Parental child-rearing behavior as measured by the Parental Bonding Instrument in a Japanese population: factor structure and relationship to a lifetime history of depression.在日本人群中,通过父母教养方式问卷测量的父母养育行为:因子结构及其与抑郁症终生史的关系。
J Affect Disord. 2000 Jan-Mar;57(1-3):229-34. doi: 10.1016/s0165-0327(99)00071-3.
6
Empirical evidence for an invariant three-factor structure of the Parental Bonding Instrument in six European countries.六个欧洲国家中父母教养方式问卷三因素不变结构的实证证据。
Psychiatry Res. 2005 Jun 30;135(3):237-47. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2005.05.002.
7
Factorial structure of the parental bonding instrument (PBI) in Japan: a study of cultural, developmental, and gender influences.日本父母教养方式问卷(PBI)的因子结构:一项关于文化、发展及性别影响的研究
Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2006 Winter;37(2):115-32. doi: 10.1007/s10578-006-0027-4.
8
Factor structure of the parental bonding instrument for pregnant Japanese women.日本孕妇父母养育状况量表的因子结构。
Sci Rep. 2022 Nov 9;12(1):19071. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-22017-2.
9
Psychometric Properties of the Parental Bonding Instrument in a Sample of Canadian Children.《加拿大儿童样本中父母养育方式问卷的心理测量特性》。
Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2020 Oct;51(5):754-768. doi: 10.1007/s10578-020-00999-2. Epub 2020 May 5.
10
A Persian version of the parental bonding instrument: factor structure and psychometric properties.父母教养方式量表的波斯语版本:结构因素和心理测量特性。
Psychiatry Res. 2015 Feb 28;225(3):580-7. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.042. Epub 2014 Dec 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Parental bonding in retrospect and adult attachment style: A comparative study between Spanish, Italian and Japanese cultures.回溯性父母教养与成人依恋风格:西班牙、意大利和日本文化之间的比较研究。
PLoS One. 2022 Dec 1;17(12):e0278185. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278185. eCollection 2022.
2
Validation and factor analysis of the parental bonding instrument in Japanese pregnant women.验证和因子分析日本孕妇父母养育方式量表。
Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 2;11(1):13759. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-93146-3.
3
Psychometric Validation of the Parental Bonding Instrument in a U.K. Population-Based Sample: Role of Gender and Association With Mental Health in Mid-Late Life.
父母教养方式问卷在英国基于人群样本中的心理测量学验证:性别作用及与中老年心理健康的关系。
Assessment. 2018 Sep;25(6):716-728. doi: 10.1177/1073191116660813. Epub 2016 Aug 1.
4
Cognitive trio: relationship with major depression and clinical predictors in Han Chinese women.认知三联症:与汉族女性重度抑郁症的关系及其临床预测因子。
Psychol Med. 2013 Nov;43(11):2265-75. doi: 10.1017/S0033291713000160. Epub 2013 Feb 21.
5
Parenting and risk for mood, anxiety and substance use disorders: a study in population-based male twins.养育方式与心境障碍、焦虑障碍和物质使用障碍风险:基于人群的男性双胞胎研究。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2013 Nov;48(11):1841-9. doi: 10.1007/s00127-013-0656-4. Epub 2013 Jan 24.
6
Can parental bonding be assessed in children? Factor structure and factorial invariance of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) between adults and children.父母联结能否在儿童中进行评估?成人与儿童之间父母教养方式问卷(PBI)的因子结构和因子不变性。
Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2012 Apr;43(2):238-53. doi: 10.1007/s10578-011-0260-3.
7
Perceived parenting and risk for major depression in Chinese women.中国女性感知到的育儿方式与重度抑郁症风险的关系。
Psychol Med. 2012 May;42(5):921-30. doi: 10.1017/S0033291711001942. Epub 2011 Sep 27.
8
Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Parental Bonding Instrument.父母教养方式评价量表中文版的心理测量学特性。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2011 May;48(5):582-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.10.008. Epub 2010 Nov 20.
9
Adverse parenting as a risk factor in the occurrence of anxiety disorders : a study in six European countries.不良养育方式作为焦虑症发生的一个风险因素:一项在六个欧洲国家开展的研究。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2008 Apr;43(4):266-72. doi: 10.1007/s00127-007-0302-0. Epub 2008 Jan 14.
10
Translation and equivalence assessment for a Japanese version of the modified parental nurturance scale: a comparative study.翻译和等效性评估一个日本版的改良父母养育量表: 一项比较研究。
Biopsychosoc Med. 2007 Jan 22;1:4. doi: 10.1186/1751-0759-1-4.