Roosa M W, Beals J
Department of Family Resources and Human Development, Arizona State University, Tempe 85287-2502.
Fam Process. 1990 Jun;29(2):191-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1990.00191.x.
The internal consistency reliabilities of 5 subscales of the Family Environment Scale were re-examined in a study of 311 stressed and 74 control families. The reliability coefficients generated were lower than those originally reported for this instrument; most coefficients generated were below the acceptable level for practical or research use, and there was considerable variation in the reliabilities across type of stressed family. An attempt to generate more reliable scales using the original items was unsuccessful, and questions about the validity of the subscales were raised. Our results illustrate the importance of examining reliabilities of instruments, even well-known and widely used instruments, for each sample studied.
在一项针对311个压力家庭和74个对照家庭的研究中,重新检验了家庭环境量表5个分量表的内部一致性信度。所产生的信度系数低于该量表最初报告的系数;所产生的大多数系数低于实际应用或研究使用的可接受水平,并且不同类型的压力家庭在信度上存在相当大的差异。试图使用原始项目生成更可靠量表的尝试未成功,并且引发了对分量表效度的质疑。我们的结果说明了针对每个研究样本检验量表信度的重要性,即使是知名且广泛使用的量表。