Baba Kaori, Takauma Fumie, Tada Katsuhiko, Tanaka Tomoko, Sakanashi Kyoko, Kataoka Yaeko, Kitamura Toshinori
Kitamura Institute of Mental Health Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Kitamura "Kokoro" Clinic Mental Health, Tokyo, Japan.
Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2017 Jul;5(3):239-247.
The Conflict Tactics Scale 1 (CTS1) is a widely used self-report measure of abusive attitudes of parents towards children. The factor structure of the CTS1 still remains to be clarified. The aim of this study was to examine the factor structure of the Japanese version of the CTS1 for postpartum women in community settings.
The data in this study came from the Okayama and Kumamoto's study. These were part of a larger survey using longitudinal questionnaire studies conducted in Japan from 2001 to 2002 and in 2011, respectively. In both study sites, the participant mothers were asked to fill in the CTS1 one month after delivery when they attended for check-up at the out-patient clinic.
A total of 1,150 questionnaires were collected, excluding the participants with missing values in the CTS1. Finally, 1,078 were included in the statistical analyses. Data of 1,078 women were divided into two parts. In the first halved sample (n=578), an exploratory factor analysis was conducted for the CTS1 items after exluding nine items with extremely low prevalence. It revealed 2-factor or 3-factor models. Then, we conducted a model comparison with the second halved sample (n=500), using confirmatory factor analysis. In terms of goodness-of-fit indeces, the 2-factor model was superior. Its subscales were Reasoning and Psycholosical Aggression.
The 2-factor model of the CTS1 consisting of Reasoning and Psychological Aggression was superior to the 3-factor model. This is not inconsistent with the original authors' theoretical model.
冲突策略量表1(CTS1)是一种广泛使用的自我报告式测量父母对子女虐待态度的工具。CTS1的因子结构仍有待阐明。本研究的目的是检验社区环境中产后女性的日语版CTS1的因子结构。
本研究的数据来自冈山和熊本的研究。这些是2001年至2002年以及2011年在日本分别进行的大型纵向问卷调查研究的一部分。在两个研究地点,参与研究的母亲们在产后一个月到门诊进行检查时被要求填写CTS1。
共收集了1150份问卷,排除CTS1中有缺失值的参与者。最终,1078份被纳入统计分析。1078名女性的数据被分为两部分。在第一个减半样本(n = 578)中,在排除9个患病率极低的项目后,对CTS1项目进行了探索性因子分析。结果显示了二因子或三因子模型。然后,我们使用验证性因子分析与第二个减半样本(n = 500)进行了模型比较。在拟合优度指标方面,二因子模型更优。其分量表为推理和心理攻击。
由推理和心理攻击组成的CTS1二因子模型优于三因子模型。这与原作者的理论模型并不矛盾。