University of Kansas, School of Education, 1122 West Campus Road, Room 316, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA.
Child Abuse Negl. 2010 Oct;34(10):762-72. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.03.003. Epub 2010 Sep 19.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the internal structure of a self-report measure of multiple family-level protective factors against abuse and neglect and explore the relationship of this instrument to other measures of child maltreatment.
For the exploratory factor analysis, 11 agencies from 4 states administered the Protective Factors Survey (PFS), the Brief Child Abuse Potential Inventory (Ondersma et al., 2005), and another measure to establish content validity (N=249 participants). Exploratory factor analyses were conducted to obtain a small, integrated set of items that tap the targeted protective factors correlated with other theoretically important constructs. Correlations were computed to explore PFS criterion-related validity. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on an additional sample of 689 participants from 19 agencies across the United States.
Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses yielded a 4-factor solution, consisting of Family Functioning, Emotional Support, Concrete Support, and Nurturing and Attachment. Four measures were administered to assess constructs that were predicted to correlate negatively with the protective factors: child abuse potential, depression, stress, and maladaptive coping. The PFS was also predicted to correlate positively with adaptive coping such as use of emotional and instrumental social support and positive reframing. Overall, the PFS subscales were significantly related to these measures in the directions predicted.
The PFS is a valid and reliable instrument to measure individual differences in multiple protective factors in families. The measure is an easily administered tool that offers programs an alternative to costly, time-intensive measures.
The PFS offers community-based prevention programs a valid and reliable survey instrument that measures multiple protective factors. The subscales-Family Functioning, Emotional Support, Concrete Supports, and Nurturing and Attachment-can be used by practitioners to understand the service population more fully, inform services, and contribute to the evidence base of a protective factors approach. Practitioners can build on the strengths or protective factors in parents and select services to address areas that are less developed.
本研究旨在评估一种针对虐待和忽视的多家庭保护因素的自我报告测量工具的内部结构,并探讨该工具与其他虐待儿童测量工具的关系。
在探索性因素分析中,来自 4 个州的 11 个机构向 249 名参与者发放了保护因素调查(PFS)、简要儿童虐待倾向量表(Ondersma 等人,2005 年)和另一种用于建立内容效度的量表。进行探索性因素分析以获得一组小型的综合项目,这些项目可以反映与其他理论上重要的结构相关的目标保护因素。计算相关系数以探索 PFS 的效标关联效度。对来自美国 19 个机构的 689 名参与者的额外样本进行验证性因素分析。
探索性和验证性因素分析得出了一个 4 因素解决方案,包括家庭功能、情感支持、具体支持以及养育和依恋。四项措施用于评估与保护因素呈负相关的预测结构:儿童虐待倾向、抑郁、压力和适应不良应对。预计 PFS 还与适应性应对(如情感和工具性社会支持的使用以及积极重新构建)呈正相关。总体而言,PFS 分量与这些测量值的相关性在预期方向上具有统计学意义。
PFS 是一种有效且可靠的工具,可衡量家庭中多种保护因素的个体差异。该测量工具易于管理,为计划提供了一种替代昂贵且耗时的测量方法。
PFS 为基于社区的预防计划提供了一种有效且可靠的调查工具,可衡量多种保护因素。子量表——家庭功能、情感支持、具体支持以及养育和依恋——可以帮助从业者更全面地了解服务人群,为服务提供信息,并为保护因素方法的证据基础做出贡献。从业者可以根据父母的优势或保护因素进行操作,并选择服务来解决发展欠佳的领域。