• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

《圣克拉拉伦理量表(SCES)波斯语版本的验证:一项针对伊朗大学生的研究》

Validation of persian version of Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES): a study among Iranian University students.

作者信息

Hoseininezhad Nahid, Nooripour Roghieh, Hosseinian Simin, Abdollahi Abbas

机构信息

Department of Counseling, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.

Department of Counseling, Qa.C., Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran.

出版信息

BMC Psychol. 2025 May 27;13(1):568. doi: 10.1186/s40359-025-02902-x.

DOI:10.1186/s40359-025-02902-x
PMID:40426274
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES) is tool for evaluating individual's ethical decision-making skills. This study aimed to investigate the validation process of the Persian version of the Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES) among Iranian university students.

METHODS

This research employed translation and validation design with cross-sectional approach, focusing on Iranian university students nationwide between May 5, 2020, and January 23, 2021. Data collection involved 537 participants (402 women and 135 men) selected through convenience sampling. After excluding 31 outliers, final sample comprised 506 respondents. These participants completed various questionnaires, including the Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES), Ethical and Legal Issues in Counseling Self-Efficacy Scale (ELICSES), Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSES), Adult Hope Scale (AHS), Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MC-SDS), and Self-Compassion Scale (SCS). The study assessed through Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient and Convergent and Divergent Validity using SPSS-21 and AMOS-24.

RESULTS

The face and content validity of the SCES were confirmed, and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) validated its one-factor structure and showed good model fit indices. The SCES demonstrated strong negative correlation with the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI-16) (r = -0.561, p < 0.01). Positive correlations were observed between the SCES and the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (SES) (r = 0.411, p < 0.01), Snyder Hope Scale (Hope) (r = 0.332, p < 0.01), Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MC-SDS) (r = 0.29, p < 0.01), Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) (r = 0.599, p < 0.01), and Ethical and Legal Issues in Counseling Self-Efficacy Scale (ELICSES) (r = 0.352, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This research supported the satisfactory validity and reliability of the Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES) in assessing ethical inclinations in Iranian university student population.

摘要

背景

圣克拉拉道德量表(SCES)是一种用于评估个体道德决策技能的工具。本研究旨在调查圣克拉拉道德量表(SCES)波斯语版本在伊朗大学生中的效度验证过程。

方法

本研究采用翻译和验证设计,并采用横断面研究方法,研究对象为2020年5月5日至2021年1月23日期间全国范围内的伊朗大学生。数据收集涉及通过便利抽样选取的537名参与者(402名女性和135名男性)。在排除31个异常值后,最终样本包括506名受访者。这些参与者完成了各种问卷,包括圣克拉拉道德量表(SCES)、咨询自我效能量表中的伦理和法律问题量表(ELICSES)、自恋人格量表(NPI)、罗森伯格自尊量表(RSES)、成人希望量表(AHS)、马洛-克劳恩社会赞许性量表(MC-SDS)和自我同情量表(SCS)。本研究使用SPSS-21和AMOS-24通过克朗巴哈α系数以及收敛效度和区分效度进行评估。

结果

证实了SCES的表面效度和内容效度,验证性因素分析(CFA)验证了其一因素结构,并显示出良好的模型拟合指数。SCES与自恋人格量表(NPI-16)呈强烈负相关(r = -0.561,p < 0.01)。在SCES与罗森伯格自尊量表(SES)(r = 0.411,p < 0.01)、斯奈德希望量表(Hope)(r = 0.332,p < 0.01)、马洛-克劳恩社会赞许性量表(MC-SDS)(r = 0.29,p < 0.01)、自我同情量表(SCS)(r = 0.599,p < 0.01)以及咨询自我效能量表中的伦理和法律问题量表(ELICSES)(r = 0.352,p < 0.05)之间观察到正相关。

结论

本研究支持圣克拉拉道德量表(SCES)在评估伊朗大学生群体道德倾向方面具有令人满意的效度和信度。

相似文献

1
Validation of persian version of Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES): a study among Iranian University students.《圣克拉拉伦理量表(SCES)波斯语版本的验证:一项针对伊朗大学生的研究》
BMC Psychol. 2025 May 27;13(1):568. doi: 10.1186/s40359-025-02902-x.
2
Validation of the Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES) in Nursing Students: The Role of Ethics as a Protector of Student Compassion.圣克拉拉伦理量表(SCES)在护理专业学生中的效度验证:伦理作为学生同情心保护因素的作用
Nurs Rep. 2024 Nov 21;14(4):3631-3642. doi: 10.3390/nursrep14040265.
3
Assessment of the validity and reliability of the nurses' professional values scale-revised in Persian version among nursing students.评估波斯语版修订后的护士职业价值观量表在护理专业学生中的有效性和可靠性。
BMC Med Educ. 2025 Jan 25;25(1):125. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-06677-y.
4
Psychometric properties of the educational leadership scale for nursing students.护理专业学生教育领导力量表的心理测量学特性
BMC Med Educ. 2025 May 6;25(1):656. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-07269-6.
5
Psychometric validation of the Persian version of the ethical awareness scale for nurses working in Iranian intensive care units.护理人员伦理意识量表在伊朗重症监护病房的信度效度检验。
Nurs Open. 2024 Jun;11(6):e2168. doi: 10.1002/nop2.2168.
6
The validity and reliability properties of a Persian version of the evidence-based practice profile (EBP) questionnaire among Iranian students of health-related fields.一个基于证据的实践概况(EBP)问卷的波斯语版本在伊朗健康相关领域学生中的有效性和可靠性特性。
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Oct 14;24(1):1143. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-06139-x.
7
Translation and psychometric evaluation of Self-Care of Hypertension Inventory Version 3.0 (SC-HI v3.0) in Iranian population.高血压自我护理量表第3.0版(SC-HI v3.0)在伊朗人群中的翻译及心理测量学评估。
Front Public Health. 2025 Mar 26;13:1423923. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1423923. eCollection 2025.
8
Psychometric properties of persian version of escapism scale among Iranian adolescents.伊朗青少年逃避现实量表波斯语版本的心理测量特性。
BMC Psychol. 2023 Oct 10;11(1):323. doi: 10.1186/s40359-023-01379-w.
9
Psychometric properties of the 9-item Posttraumatic Cognitions Inventory (PTCI-9) in an Iranian sample.9项创伤后认知量表(PTCI-9)在伊朗样本中的心理测量学特性。
Trends Psychiatry Psychother. 2024;46:e20220534. doi: 10.47626/2237-6089-2022-0534. Epub 2023 Jan 16.
10
Decisional Balance Inventory (DBI) Adolescent Form for Smoking: Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version.吸烟决策平衡量表青少年版(DBI):波斯语版本的心理测量特性
BMC Public Health. 2017 May 25;17(1):507. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4425-2.

本文引用的文献

1
Validation of the Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES) in Nursing Students: The Role of Ethics as a Protector of Student Compassion.圣克拉拉伦理量表(SCES)在护理专业学生中的效度验证:伦理作为学生同情心保护因素的作用
Nurs Rep. 2024 Nov 21;14(4):3631-3642. doi: 10.3390/nursrep14040265.
2
Assessing the relationship between ethical reasoning confidence and self-esteem among female nursing students for enhancing the quality of work life: A cross-sectional study.评估女护生伦理推理信心与自尊的关系对提高工作生活质量的意义:一项横断面研究。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Apr 5;103(14):e37614. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037614.
3
Integrating AI in medical education: embracing ethical usage and critical understanding.
将人工智能融入医学教育:秉持道德使用并进行批判性理解。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Oct 13;10:1279707. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1279707. eCollection 2023.
4
Why we need to abandon fixed cutoffs for goodness-of-fit indices: An extensive simulation and possible solutions.为何我们需要摒弃适切性指数的固定临界值:广泛的模拟与可能的解决方案。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Apr;56(4):3891-3914. doi: 10.3758/s13428-023-02193-3. Epub 2023 Aug 28.
5
Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education.人工智能对教育中决策、懒惰和安全方面人类损失的影响。
Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2023;10(1):311. doi: 10.1057/s41599-023-01787-8. Epub 2023 Jun 9.
6
Psychometric Validation of the Persian Self-Compassion Scale Youth Version.波斯语版青少年自我同情量表的心理测量学验证
Mindfulness (N Y). 2022;13(2):385-397. doi: 10.1007/s12671-021-01801-7. Epub 2022 Jan 7.
7
Impact of Ethical Leadership on Employee Engagement: Role of Self-Efficacy and Organizational Commitment.道德领导对员工敬业度的影响:自我效能感与组织承诺的作用
Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ. 2021 Aug 25;11(3):962-974. doi: 10.3390/ejihpe11030071.
8
Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples.立意抽样:复杂还是简单?研究案例
J Res Nurs. 2020 Dec;25(8):652-661. doi: 10.1177/1744987120927206. Epub 2020 Jun 18.
9
The Inconvenient Truth About Convenience and Purposive Samples.关于便利样本和有目的样本的尴尬真相。
Indian J Psychol Med. 2021 Jan;43(1):86-88. doi: 10.1177/0253717620977000. Epub 2020 Dec 17.
10
Effect of Ethics Seminar on Moral Sensitivity and Ethical Behavior of Clinical Nurses.伦理研讨会对临床护士道德敏感性和伦理行为的影响。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Dec 31;18(1):241. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18010241.