A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

Wongpakaran Tinakon,Wongpakaran Nahathai 대한신경정신의학회 2012 PSYCHIATRY INVESTIGATION Vol.9 No.2

ObjectiveaaThe Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a widely used instrument that has been tested for reliability and validity in many settings; however, some negative-worded items appear to have caused it to reveal low reliability in a number of studies. In this study, we revised one negative item that had previously (from the previous studies) produced the worst outcome in terms of the structure of the scale, then re-analyzed the new version for its reliability and construct validity, comparing it to the original version with respect to fit indices. MethodsaaIn total, 851 students from Chiang Mai University (mean age: 19.51±1.7, 57% of whom were female), participated in this study. Of these, 664 students completed the Thai version of the original RSES - containing five positively worded and five negatively worded items, while 187 students used the revised version containing six positively worded and four negatively worded items. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied, using a uni-dimensional model with method effects and a correlated uniqueness approach. ResultsaaThe revised version showed the same level of reliability (good) as the original, but yielded a better model fit. The revised RSES demonstrated excellent fit statistics, with χ2=29.19 (df=19, n=187, p=0.063), GFI=0.970, TFI=0.969, NFI=0.964, CFI=0.987, SRMR=0.040 and RMSEA=0.054. ConclusionaaThe revised version of the Thai RSES demonstrated an equivalent level of reliability but a better construct validity when compared to the original.

A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

Wongpakaran Tinakon,Wongpakaran Nahathai 대한신경정신의학회 2012 PSYCHIATRY INVESTIGATION Vol.9 No.1

Objective The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a widely used instrument that has been tested for reliability and validity in many settings; however, some negative-worded items appear to have caused it to reveal low reliability in a number of studies. In this study, we revised one negative item that had previously (from the previous studies) produced the worst outcome in terms of the structure of the scale, then re-analyzed the new version for its reliability and construct validity, comparing it to the original version with respect to fit indices. MethodsaaIn total, 851 students from Chiang Mai University (mean age: 19.51±1.7, 57% of whom were female), participated in this study. Of these, 664 students completed the Thai version of the original RSES - containing five positively worded and five negatively worded items, while 187 students used the revised version containing six positively worded and four negatively worded items. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied, using a uni-dimensional model with method effects and a correlated uniqueness approach. ResultsaaThe revised version showed the same level of reliability (good) as the original, but yielded a better model fit. The revised RSES demonstrated excellent fit statistics, with χ2=29.19 (df=19, n=187, p=0.063), GFI=0.970, TFI=0.969, NFI=0.964, CFI=0.987, SRMR=0.040 and RMSEA=0.054. ConclusionaaThe revised version of the Thai RSES demonstrated an equivalent level of reliability but a better construct validity when compared to the original. Objective The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a widely used instrument that has been tested for reliability and validity in many settings; however, some negative-worded items appear to have caused it to reveal low reliability in a number of studies. In this study, we revised one negative item that had previously (from the previous studies) produced the worst outcome in terms of the structure of the scale, then re-analyzed the new version for its reliability and construct validity, comparing it to the original version with respect to fit indices. MethodsaaIn total, 851 students from Chiang Mai University (mean age: 19.51±1.7, 57% of whom were female), participated in this study. Of these, 664 students completed the Thai version of the original RSES - containing five positively worded and five negatively worded items, while 187 students used the revised version containing six positively worded and four negatively worded items. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied, using a uni-dimensional model with method effects and a correlated uniqueness approach. ResultsaaThe revised version showed the same level of reliability (good) as the original, but yielded a better model fit. The revised RSES demonstrated excellent fit statistics, with χ2=29.19 (df=19, n=187, p=0.063), GFI=0.970, TFI=0.969, NFI=0.964, CFI=0.987, SRMR=0.040 and RMSEA=0.054. ConclusionaaThe revised version of the Thai RSES demonstrated an equivalent level of reliability but a better construct validity when compared to the original.

Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia: Study of Residents in a Northern Thai Long-Term Care Home

Nahathai Wongpakaran,Tinakon Wongpakaran 대한신경정신의학회 2013 PSYCHIATRY INVESTIGATION Vol.10 No.4

Objective This study aimed to analyse the validity of the Thai version of the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) when using DSM-IV criteria. Methods A cross-sectional study was carried out of 84 elderly residents in a residential care home setting in Thailand. The participants went through a comprehensive geriatric assessment which included a Mini-Mental State Examination, a Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) and use of the CSDD tool. A ROC analysis was performed in order to test the validity of the CSDD as against the DSM-IV when used by the MINI. Results ROC analysis revealed a better score for those areas found under the curve for the CSDD-as against the DSM-IV criteria (0.96). With a cut-off score of >6, the CSDD yielded the highest sensitivity score (100%), plus produced a specificity of 81% and a negative predictive value of 100%. It also had a positive predictive value of 69%. The validity of the CSDD was found to be better for the group experiencing cognitive impairment than with the non-cognitive impairment group in terms of the agreement of CSDD items between patients and caregivers. The CSDD yielded a high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.87). Conclusion CSDD is a valid tool to use for identifying depressive disorders among Thai LTC home residents - those experiencing and those not experiencing cognitive impairment.

Prevalence of Anxiety May Not be Elevated in Thai Ovarian Cancer Patients Following Treatment

Chittrakul, Saranya,Charoenkwan, Kittipat,Wongpakaran, Nahathai Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2015 Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention Vol.16 No.3

Background: To compare prevalence of anxiety in ovarian cancer patients following primary treatment to that of normal women and to examine predicting factor. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 56 ovarian cancer patients who had primary surgical treatment within the past five years (cancer group) and 56 age-matched women who attended an outpatient clinic for check-ups (non-cancer group) were recruited from June 2013 to January 2014. The hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), was used to determine anxiety level of the participants with the score of ${\geq}11$ suggestive of anxiety. The prevalence of anxiety symptoms and mean HADS scores for anxiety were compared between the study groups. For those with ovarian cancer, associations of demographic and clinical factors with anxiety was examined. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: Participants in the non-cancer group had higher rate of medical comorbidity, higher salary, and more frequent university education. The prevalence of anxiety was not different between the groups, at 7.1% each. The mean HADS scores for anxiety subscale were not significantly different between the groups, 5.0 in the cancer group vs 6.1 in the non-cancer group (p=0.09). On multivariable analysis, no demographic or clinical factors significantly associated with anxiety were identified. For the cancer group, no association between any particular factors and anxiety was demonstrated. Conclusions: The prevalence of anxiety in women with ovarian cancer following primary treatment was comparable to that of normal women seeking routine check-up.