Bernstein I H, Keith J B
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, Arlington.
Health Educ Q. 1991 Summer;18(2):207-20. doi: 10.1177/109019819101800206.
Eisen, Zellman, and McAlister proposed a 22-item scale to measure four Health Belief Model (HBM) constructs as applied to adolescent contraceptive behavior. Their factor analysis led them to conclude that there were several discrepancies in their proposed scales. We suggest that they were unduly pessimistic. Although their proposed scales could stand improvement, they are adequate preliminary tools. The major reason they concluded that the scales were deficient was that they applied criteria that are generally appropriate for continuous data to their inherently discrete (categorical) item response data. A secondary consideration is that confirmatory methods of factor analysis can yield results that bear more directly on their proposed organization of items than the traditional exploratory methods that they used. A reanalysis of their data suggests that their proposed scales have fewer problems than they believed they had. Our results increase the likelihood of standardizing HBM measures.
艾森、泽尔曼和麦卡利斯特提出了一个包含22个条目的量表，用于测量应用于青少年避孕行为的健康信念模型（HBM）的四个构成要素。他们的因子分析使他们得出结论，认为他们提出的量表存在若干差异。我们认为他们过于悲观了。尽管他们提出的量表有待改进，但它们是足够的初步工具。他们得出量表存在缺陷这一结论的主要原因是，他们将通常适用于连续数据的标准应用于其本质上离散（分类）的项目反应数据。其次要考虑的是，与他们所使用的传统探索性方法相比，验证性因子分析方法能够得出与他们所提议的项目组织更直接相关的结果。对他们数据的重新分析表明，他们提出的量表所存在的问题比他们认为的要少。我们的结果增加了使HBM测量标准化的可能性。
