Suppr超能文献

基于项目反应理论的信任评估量表比较

Comparison of Trust Assessment Scales Based on Item Response Theory.

作者信息

Dai Buyun, Zhang Wenqing, Wang Yang, Jian Xiaozhu

机构信息

School of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, China.

Education Center for Mental Health, Jiangxi University of Applied Science, Nanchang, China.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2020 Jan 23;11:10. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00010. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

Three widely used interpersonal trust measurement scales [Interpersonal Trust Scale (ITS), Philosophies of Human Nature Scale (RPHNS), Company Trust Scale (CTS)] have seldom been applied in non-Western contexts. Different social environments may lead to variation in the level or structure of trust. Therefore, it is necessary to compare the applicability of these scales to different levels of trust-related traits in Eastern cultures so that researchers can choose appropriate scales for relevant studies. This study attempted to conduct a comparative analysis of the ITS, RPHNS, and CTS. A sample of 725 Chinese college students was analyzed. Total score correlations and latent factor correlations estimated by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for a first-order three-factor model were assessed, and then the quality of the item parameters, test reliability and standard errors, and test information were assessed. The results are as follows: (1) the ITS and the RPHNS assessed almost the same trust traits; therefore, only the ITS and the RPHNS are compared in the next sections; (2) the original structure of only the RPHNS is verified; (3) some items on the ITS do not work well, while the RPHNS has higher overall test reliability; and (4) the average item information provided by the RPHNS is higher across all trait levels. In most cases, the RPHNS is the better choice in the Chinese cultural context.

摘要

三种广泛使用的人际信任测量量表[人际信任量表(ITS)、人性哲学量表(RPHNS)、公司信任量表(CTS)]很少在非西方背景下应用。不同的社会环境可能导致信任水平或结构的差异。因此,有必要比较这些量表在东方文化中对不同信任相关特质水平的适用性,以便研究人员能够为相关研究选择合适的量表。本研究试图对ITS、RPHNS和CTS进行比较分析。对725名中国大学生的样本进行了分析。评估了一阶三因素模型通过验证性因素分析(CFA)估计的总分相关性和潜在因素相关性,然后评估了项目参数的质量、测试信度和标准误差以及测试信息。结果如下:(1)ITS和RPHNS评估的信任特质几乎相同;因此,在下文中仅比较ITS和RPHNS;(2)仅验证了RPHNS的原始结构;(3)ITS上的一些项目效果不佳,而RPHNS的总体测试信度更高;(4)RPHNS在所有特质水平上提供的平均项目信息更高。在大多数情况下, 在中华文化背景下,RPHNS是更好的选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验