Michalopoulos Lynn T M, Murray Laura K, Kane Jeremy C, Skavenski van Wyk Stephanie, Chomba Elwyn, Cohen Judith, Imasiku Mwiya, Semrau Katherine, Unick Jay, Bolton Paul A
Social Intervention Group, Global Health Research Center of Central Asia, School of Social Work, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Center for Refugee and Disaster Response, Department of International Health, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 16;10(4):e0123820. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123820. eCollection 2015.
The aim of the current study is to test the validity and reliability of the Shame Questionnaire among traumatized girls in Lusaka, Zambia.
The Shame Questionnaire was validated through both classical test and item response theory methods. Internal reliability, criterion validity and construct validity were examined among a sample of 325 female children living in Zambia. Sub-analyses were conducted to examine differences in construct validity among girls who reported sexual abuse and girls who did not.
All girls in the sample were sexually abused, but only 61.5% endorsed or reported that sexual abuse had occurred. Internal consistency was very good among the sample with alpha = .87. Criterion validity was demonstrated through a significant difference of mean Shame Questionnaire scores between girls who experienced 0-1 trauma events and more than one traumatic event, with higher mean Shame Questionnaire scores among girls who had more than one traumatic event (p = .004 for 0-1 compared to 2 and 3 events and p = .016 for 0-1 compared to 4+ events). Girls who reported a history of witnessing or experiencing physical abuse had a significantly higher mean Shame Questionnaire score than girls who did not report a history of witnessing or experiencing physical abuse (p<.0001). There was no significant difference in mean Shame Questionnaire score between girls who reported a sexual abuse history and girls who did not. Exploratory factor analysis indicated a two-factor model of the Shame Questionnaire, with an experience of shame dimension and an active outcomes of shame dimension. Item response theory analysis indicated adequate overall item fit. Results also indicate potential differences in construct validity between girls who did and did not endorse sexual abuse.
This study suggests the general utility of the Shame Questionnaire among Zambian girls and demonstrates the need for more psychometric studies in low and middle income countries.
本研究旨在检验羞耻感问卷在赞比亚卢萨卡受创伤女孩中的有效性和可靠性。
通过经典测试和项目反应理论方法对羞耻感问卷进行验证。在325名生活在赞比亚的女童样本中检验内部信度、效标效度和结构效度。进行子分析以检验报告遭受性虐待的女孩和未报告遭受性虐待的女孩在结构效度上的差异。
样本中的所有女孩都遭受过性虐待，但只有61.5%认可或报告发生过性虐待。样本中的内部一致性非常好，阿尔法系数为0.87。效标效度通过经历0 - 1次创伤事件的女孩和经历不止一次创伤事件的女孩在羞耻感问卷平均得分上的显著差异得以证明，经历不止一次创伤事件的女孩的羞耻感问卷平均得分更高（0 - 1次事件与2次和3次事件相比，p = 0.004；0 - 1次事件与4次及以上事件相比，p = 0.016）。报告有目睹或经历身体虐待史的女孩的羞耻感问卷平均得分显著高于未报告有目睹或经历身体虐待史的女孩（p < 0.0001）。报告有性虐待史的女孩和未报告有性虐待史的女孩在羞耻感问卷平均得分上没有显著差异。探索性因素分析表明羞耻感问卷有一个双因素模型，即羞耻体验维度和羞耻积极结果维度。项目反应理论分析表明项目总体拟合良好。结果还表明认可和未认可性虐待的女孩在结构效度上可能存在差异。
本研究表明羞耻感问卷在赞比亚女孩中具有普遍实用性，并证明在低收入和中等收入国家需要进行更多的心理测量学研究。
