目的 探讨矛盾年龄歧视量表在我国社区老年人中使用的信效度。方法 于2023年1—4月采用便利抽样法选取济南市3个社区中的377名老年人进行调查,评价量表的信度和效度。结果 删除条目1后形成3维度,12条目的中文版矛盾年龄歧视量表。内容效度上,该量表I-CVI为1.000,S-CVI/UA为1.000;探索性因子分析固定3因子,最终累计方差解释率68.351%。验证性因子分析中的模型拟合指数（χ2/df=1.534,RMSEA=0.047,CFI=0.991,TLI=0.988,SRMR=0.020）提示结构效度良好。SRW在0.815~0.919之间,AVE=0.726、0.811、0.797,CR=0.841、0.963、0.940,AVE平方根0.852~0.901大于各维度间相关系数0.560~0.574（P<0.001）,说明收敛效度和区分效度良好。该量表与日常年龄歧视量表总得分成正相关（r=0.702,P<0.001）,具有良好的效标效度。信度上,总量表的内部一致性为为0.902,Guttman折半信度为0.774,Omega组合信度为0.890,4周后重测信度为0.780。结论 中文版矛盾年龄歧视量表的信度和效度良好,是测量社区老年人对善意、敌意年龄歧视态度的有效工具。
Abstract
Objective To test the reliability and validity of the Ambivalent Ageism Scale (AAS) among community-dwelling older adults in China. Methods Totally 377 community-dwelling older adults from January to April 2023 were randomly selected from 3 communities of Jinan city by convenience sampling to test the reliability and validity of the AAS. Results The Chinese version of AAS consisted of 3 dimensions, involving 12 items after 1 item was removed. In terms of content validity, I-CVI was 1.000, and S-CVI/UA 1.000. Exploratory factor analysis fixed 3 common factors, accounting for 68.351% of the cumulative contribution of variance. By confirmatory factor analysis, the model fitting index (χ2/df=1.534, RMSEA=0.047, CFI=0.991, TLI=0.988, SRMR=0.020) suggested good structural validity. SRW was between 0.815 and 0.919; when AVE=0.726, 0.811, 0.797, CR=0.841, 0.963, 0.940. AVE square root (0.852~0.901) was greater than the correlation coefficient among each dimension (0.560~0.574) (P<0.001), showing good convergent validity and discriminatory validity. The scale had positive correlation with the total score of the Everyday Ageism Scale (r=0.702, P<0.001), indicating good criterion validity. In terms of reliability, the internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale was 0.902; the Guttman split-half reliability coefficient 0.774; the Omega combination reliability coefficient 0.890, and the 4-week test-retest reliability 0.780. Conclusion The Chinese version of the AAS is reliable and valid, which is an effective tool for measuring the attitudes of the hostile ageism and benevolent ageism of the community-dwelling older adults in China.
关键词
矛盾年龄歧视量表 /
老年人 /
信度 /
效度
Key words
the Ambivalent Ageism Scale /
older adult /
reliability /
validity
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] Fiske ST, Cuddy AJ, Glick P,et al.A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition[J]. J Pers Soc Psychol, 2002,82(6):878-902.
[2] Glick P, Fiske ST.The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism[J]. J Pers Soc Psychol,1996,70(3):491-512.DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.
[3] Cary LA, Chasteen AL, Remedios J.The Ambivalent Ageism Scale: developing and validating a scale to measure benevolent and hostile ageism[J]. Gerontologist, 2017,57(2):e27-e36. DOI:10.1093/geront/gnw118.
[4] Palmore E.The ageism survey: first findings[J]. Gerontologist, 2001,41(5):572-575. DOI:10.1093/geront/41.5.572.
[5] Apriceno M, Lytle A, Monahan C,et al.Prioritizing health care and employment resources during COVID-19: roles of benevolent and hostile ageism[J]. Gerontologist, 2021,61(1):98-102. DOI:10.1093/geront/gnaa165.
[6] Taşdemir N. Young group identification and motives as predictors of ageism, aging anxiety, and life satisfaction[J]. J Genet Psychol,2020,181(5):375-390.DOI:10.1080/00221325.2020.1783195.
[7] Ribeiro-Gonçalves JA, Costa PA, Leal I.Loneliness, ageism, and mental health: the buffering role of resilience in seniors[J]. Int J Clin Health Psychol, 2023,23(1):100339. DOI:10.1016/j.ijchp.2022.100339.
[8] 吴洪翔,宋意霞,吴文峰. 矛盾年龄偏见量表在中国大学生群体中的修订及信效度检验[J]. 心理学探新,2022,42(2):171-177.
[9] 吴明隆. SPSS统计应用实务-问卷分析与应用统计[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2003:62-110.
[10] 吴明隆. 结构方程模型-AMOS的操作与应用[M]. 2版. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2010.
[11] Allen JO, Solway E, Kirch M, et al.The Everyday Ageism Scale: development and evaluation[J]. J Aging Health, 2022,34(2):147-157. DOI:10.1177/08982643211036131.
[12] 李潇. 脑卒中患者康复需求评估工具的研制[D]. 太原:山西医科大学,2022.
[13] 薛朝霞,毕婧华,程萧,等. 中文版Geurten执行功能问卷在大学生中的信效度检验[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志,2022,30(3):525-530,567.DOI:10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2022.03.006.
[14] 史静琤,莫显昆,孙振球. 量表编制中内容效度指数的应用[J]. 中南大学学报(医学版),2012,37(2):152-155. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-7347.2012.02.007.
[15] 刘丽萍,周春兰,吴艳妮,等. 情绪抑制量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报,2020,27(8):6-10. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2020.08.006.
[16] 吴明隆. 问卷统计分析实务-SPSS操作与应用[M].重庆:重庆大学出版社,2010:166-188.
[17] 刘小琳,高隽. 痛苦容忍度量表中文版修订及其信效度检验[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志,2023,31(1):96-101. DOI:10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2023.01.017.
[18] 温忠麟,黄彬彬,汤丹丹. 问卷数据建模前传[J]. 心理科学,2018,41(1):204-210.DOI:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20180130.
[19] 罗忠琛,唐娇,郑艺平,等. 卫生保健相关后悔应对量表的汉化及其在实习护生中的信效度检验[J].护理学报,2022,29(22):58-64. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2022.22.058.
[20] 刘凯莉,罗艳艳,姚桂英,等. 晚期癌症患者安宁疗护态度量表的汉化及信效度分析[J]. 护理学报,2022,29(16):11-16. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2022.16.011.
[21] 邱皓政. 量化研究与统计分析-SPSS中文视窗版数据分析范例解析[M]. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2009.
[22] 戴晓阳,曹亦薇. 心理评定量表的编制和修订中存在的一些问题[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志,2009,17(5):562-565.
[23] Barroso IC.Ageism: a study in five parishes in the lower municipality of Póvoa de Lanhoso[D]. Coimbra: Instituto Superior Miguel Torga, 2018.
基金
山东省卫生健康委员会委托项目（1330022001）; 山东省社科规划项目（15CCXJ11）
PDF(670 KB)
