以质量求发展，以服务铸品牌

护理学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (23): 29-34.doi: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2023.23.029

• 护理管理 • 上一篇    下一篇

工作中伦理型领导问卷的汉化及在护士群体中的信效度检验

佘佳晨1, 张金燕2, 张瑞星1, 梅永霞1, 李洪峰1   

  1. 1.郑州大学护理与健康学院,河南 郑州 450001;
    2.郑州大学第三附属医院,河南 郑州 450052
  • 收稿日期:2023-07-28 出版日期:2023-12-10 发布日期:2024-01-09
  • 通讯作者: 李洪峰（1976-）,男,河南三门峡人,博士,副教授。E-mail：lhfchina@zzu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:佘佳晨（2000-）,女,河南新乡人,本科学历,硕士研究生在读。
  • 基金资助:
    河南省医学教育研究项目（Wjlx2018057）

Translation of Ethical Leadership at Work Questionnaire in nurses and its validity and reliability

SHE Jia-chen1, ZHANG Jin-yan2, ZHANG Rui-xing1, MEI Yong-xia1, LI Hong-feng1   

  1. 1. School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China;
    2. The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, China
  • Received:2023-07-28 Online:2023-12-10 Published:2024-01-09

PDF (PC)

379

赞

摘要： 目的 汉化工作中伦理型领导问卷(Ethical Leadership at Work Questionnaire,ELW),并检验其在护士群体中的信效度。方法 基于Brislin翻译模式对ELW进行翻译、回译,经过文化调适和预调查形成中文版ELW。于2023年1—3月便利抽取郑州市4所三级甲等医院536名护士进行问卷调查以检验中文版ELW的信效度。结果 中文版ELW包括以人为本、公平公正、权力分享与可持续发展、伦理指导、诚实守信、明确职责6个维度、37个条目。探索性因子分析提取6个公因子,累积方差贡献率59.906%。验证性因子分析支持一阶六因子模型假设,且模型适配度评价指标均达到了统计学标准。条目水平内容效度指数为0.830~1.000,平均量表水平内容效度指数为0.959。该问卷的Cronbach's α系数为0.958,折半信度为0.891,重测信度为0.957。结论 中文版ELW具有良好的信效度,可用于评价我国文化背景下护士感知的伦理型领导水平。

关键词: 护士, 伦理型领导, 信度, 效度

Abstract: Objective To translate the Ethical Leadership at Work Questionnaire (ELW) in nurses and to test its reliability and validity. Methods Based on Brislin's translation model, the Chinese version of ELW was developed through translation, back-translation, cultural adaptation, and pre-survey. A sample of 536 nurses from four tertiary grade-A hospitals in Zhengzhou was conveniently selected from January to March 2023 for a questionnaire survey to test the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of ELW. Results The Chinese version of ELW consisted of 37 items in 6 dimensions: human-centeredness, fairness and equity, power sharing and sustainable development, ethical guidance, honesty and trustworthiness, and clear responsibilities. Exploratory factor analysis extracted six common factors, with a cumulative variance contribution of 59.906%. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the hypothesis of the first-order six-factor model, and the evaluation indexes of model fitness reached statistical standard. The item level content validity index of the scale was 0.830~1.000, and the average scale level content validity index 0.959. It had a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.958, a split-half reliability of 0.891, and a test-retest reliability of 0.957. Conclusion The Chinese version of ELW demonstrates good reliability and validity in assessing nurses'perceived ethical leadership within Chinese cultural context.

Key words: nurse, ethical leadership, reliability, validity

中图分类号: 

  • R47
[1] Brown ME, Trevino LK, Harrison DA.Ethical leadership: a social learning perspective for construct development and testing[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2005, 97(2):117-134.DOI:10.1016/ j.obhdp.2005.03.002.
[2] Yilmaz D U, Duzgun F, Yilmaz D.Relationship between ethical leadership behavior and work motivation in intensive care nurses: a cross-sectional study[J]. Galician Medical Journal, 2020, 27(1): E202011. DOI:10.21802/gmj.2020.1.1.
[3] Kalyar Mn, Usta A, Shafique I.When ethical leadership and LMX are more effective in prompting creativity the moderating role of psychological capital[J]. Baltic Journal of Management, 2020, 15(1):61-80. DOI:10.1108/BJM-02-2019-0042.
[4] Qiu S, Dooley Lm, Deng R, et al.Does ethical leadership boost nurses'patient-oriented organizational citizenship behaviours? A cross-sectional study[J]. J Adv Nurs, 2020, 76(7):1603-1613. DOI:10.1111/jan.14366.
[5] El-Gazar He, Zoromba Ma.Ethical leadership, flourishing, and Extra-Role behavior among nurses[J]. Sage Open Nursing,2021,7:23779608211062669.DOI:10.1177/23779608211062669.
[6] Arslan Gg, Özden D, Göktuna G, et al.Missed nursing care and its relationship with perceived ethical leadership[J]. Nursing ethics, 2022, 29(1):35-48. DOI:10.1177/09697330211006823.
[7] Kalshoven K, Den Hartog Dn, De Hoogh A H B. Ethical leadership at work questionnaire (ELW): development and validation of a multidimensional measure[J]. Leadership Quarterly, 2011, 22(1):51-69. DOI:10.1016/ j.leaqua. 2010.12.007.
[8] Kim S, Jeong Sh, Seo Mh.Nurses' ethical leadership and related outcome variables: systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. J Nurs Manag, 2022, 30(7):2308-2323. DOI: 10.1111/jonm.13726.
[9] 任仕泉, 陈峰, 杨树勤. 重复采样试验设计的样本含量估计[J]. 中国卫生统计, 1999, 16(4):194-196. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-3674.1999.04.001.
[10] 袁中清, 王佳琳, 金曼, 等. 护士心理资本量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2023, 58(1):74-80. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2023.01.010.
[11] Kim Je, Park Ej.A validation study of the modified Korean Version of Ethical Leadership at Work Questionnaire(K-ELW)[J]. J Korean Acad Nurs, 2015,45(2):240-250. DOI: 10.4040/jkan.2015.45.2.240.
[12] Brislin. Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials[M]. Boston:MA:Allyn & Bacon. 1980: 389-444.
[13] 王凯选, 李培宇, 王文远, 等. 心力衰竭患者照顾者自我护理贡献量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(13):1585-1590. DOI:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2022.13.008.
[14] 张佳惠, 庞书勤, 洪雪珮, 等. 老年前期人群退休规划过程量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2023, 30(10): 1-6. DOI: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2023.10.001.
[15] 张晨, 周云仙. 我国护理测量工具文献中内容效度指数应用误区分析[J]. 护理学杂志, 2020, 35(4):86-88. DOI:10.3870/j.issn.1001-4152.2020.04.086.
[16] 刘言, 顾平. 母乳喂养动机量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(12):1531-1536. DOI:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2022.12.019.
[17] 董世攀, 梁小英, 黄兰怡, 等. 功能性腹胀患者健康促进行为量表的汉化及信效度检验[J].护理学报, 2023, 30(3):11-15. DOI: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2023.03.011.
[18] 苗康康, 陈勤. 儿童环境健康知识和技能问卷的汉化及信效度分析[J]. 护理学报, 2023, 30(2):17-22. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2023.02.017.
[19] Steinmann B, Nübold A,Maier GW.Validation of a german version of the ethical leadership at work questionnaire by kalshoven et al. (2011)[J]. Front Psychol, 2016, 7(1):446. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00446.
[20] Tsai A Yj, Tan A Yk.Exploratory examination of environmental protection behaviors in a hospital setting using the theory of planned behavior and ethical leadership[J]. Environmental Research Communications, 2022, 4(7):1-12. DOI:10.1088/2515-7620/ac7e31.
[21] 谭明杨, 李红玉, 赵瑞. 围术期病人隐私量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理研究, 2023, 37(4):619-623. DOI:10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2023.04.010.
[22] 李峥,刘宇. 护理学研究方法[M]. 2版. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2018.
[23] Barkhordari-Sharifabad M, Ashktorab T, Atashzadeh-Shoorideh F.Ethical leadership outcomes in nursing: a qualitative study[J]. Nursing ethics, 2018, 25(8):1051-1063. DOI:10.1177/0969733016687157.
[1] 张玺, 黄静, 汪天华, 李燕, 曹沅, 李明惠, 余立平. 发育障碍儿童养育心理韧性量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 6-11.
[2] 田美雨, 王翠玲, 高若男, 田佳, 刘怡. 妇科肿瘤科护士性健康照护培训方案的构建[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 18-23.
[3] 彭琦, 吴婉英, 谢玲女. 造口伤口失禁专科护士培训中基于ADDIE模型案例教学的实践及效果评价[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 24-27.
[4] 吴超瑜, 刘尚昆. 麻醉恢复室护士危机管理能力的质性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(3): 17-21.
[5] 郝瑞霞, 王秀梅, 蔚玲, 郭越, 张学. 磁性医院管理理念对手术室护士出勤主义行为的影响[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(3): 27-31.
[6] 李雪, 廖常菊, 张健, 丁娟, 陈晓丽, 胡玉庭. 三级甲等医院ICU护士睡眠障碍的风险预测模型构建及验证[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(2): 63-69.
[7] 李静依, 梁冠冕, 缪群芳, 赵月琰, 王晓宁, 钱萍萍. 临床护士死亡工作自我应对能力潜在剖面及影响因素研究[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(1): 13-18.
[8] 王子萱, 原振青, 赵一鋆, 王惠平, 洪菲菲, 邹敏. 体面劳动感在三级甲等医院手术室护士反思能力与创新行为的中介效应[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(1): 62-67.
[9] 徐晓东, 刘顺梅, 赵瑄, 丁秀娜. 显微根尖外科手术护士核心能力评价指标的构建[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(8): 69-73.
[10] 马瑞瑞, 范晓莉, 徐姝娟, 张伟, 陈婷, 谈飞飞. 护士参与终末期患者临终决策体验的质性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(7): 6-11.
[11] 丁心舒, 孙乐菲, 高伟, 鲁琦, 闫畅, 刘德山. 矛盾年龄歧视量表在社区老年人中的信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(7): 12-16.
[12] 龙瑶, 卢春凤, 冯志仙. 临床护士对横向领导者特质感知的质性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(7): 27-31.
[13] 张颖, 车晓艳, 万婠, 秦雪, 张恩思, 崇武, 郑淑娟. 我国性治疗护士工作范畴和核心能力的质性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(7): 68-72.
[14] 王静, 李萍, 王妍, 张琴, 侯铭, 王孜凡. 2 050名三级甲等医院护士组织公民行为现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(6): 67-72.
[15] 袁华君, 段功香, 陈路桥, 王慧清. 癌症终末期患者救护意愿量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(6): 73-78.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
No Suggested Reading articles found!