نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی ارشد روانشناسی بالینی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران.

2 گروه روانشناسی بالینی، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

هدف این پژوهش انطباق‌سازی و بررسی ویژگی‌های روانسنجی نسخه‌ی فارسی پرسشنامه‌ی امنیت در زیرسیستم بین‌والدینی (SIS) در نوجوانان بود. بدین منظور، نسخه‌ی انگلیسی پرسشنامه‌ی امنیت در زیر سیستم بین والدینی (SIS) به صورت مضاعف ترجمه و بر 587 دانش‌آموز ( 269پسر و 318دختر) پایه های اول و دوم متوسطه شهر شیراز در سال تحصیلی 1397-1398 اجرا شد. بعد از اجرا، ضریب همسانی درونی (آلفای کرونباخ) برای اعتباریابی خرده‌مقیاس‌ها و تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی و تأییدی برای بررسی ساختار عاملی و رواسازی پرسشنامه محاسبه شد.. داده‌ها توسط برنامه‌ی SPSS 16 و LISREL-8.7 مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت. در بررسی ساختار عاملی این پرسشنامه با استفاده از روش تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی 9 عامل استخراج شد که 8/57 درصد واریانس را تبیین می‌کرد. نتایج تحلیل عاملی تأییدی نیز حاکی از برازش مطلوب و قابل قبول مدل 9 عاملی بود. دامنه ضرایب آلفای کرونباخ در کل مقیاس بین 29/0 تا 80/0 قرار داشت. نتایج حاکی از آن است که نسخه‌ی فارسی پرسشنامه‌ی امنیت در زیرسیستم بین‌والدینی در جامعه‌ی ایران از اعتبار و روایی مناسبی برخوردار است و ابزاری مناسب جهت فرایندهای غربالگری، تشخیص و درمان مشکلات مختلف هیجانی در موقعیت‌های بالینی و پژوهشی می‌باشد

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Psychometric Properties of Persian version of The security in the Interparental Subsystem Scales (SIS)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Alale Oboudi 1
  • Maryam Moghadasin 2
  • jafar hasani 2

1 M.A student cilinical psychology university of kharazmi

2 Department of clinical psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational , Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to prepare a Persian version of the Security in the Inter-Parental Subsystem scales (SIS), and to examine its psychometric properties in the Iranian adolescent community. The English version of the SIS questionnaire was translated and back-translated prior to its administration to 587 students (269 boys and 318 girls) from the first and second grades of high school in Shiraz at 2019-2020. After administration, the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach's alpha) was calculated to validate the subscales and also exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was assessed to examine the factor structure and validation of the questionnaire. In examining the factor structure of this questionnaire, 9 factors were extracted using the exploratory factor analysis method, which explained 57.8% of the variance The results of confirmatory factor analysis also indicated aد acceptable fit of the 9-factor model. The range of alpha coefficients in the girls group was between 0.34 to 0.82, in the boys group between 0.20 to 0.80 and in the whole scale was between 0.29 to 0.80. According to the results of the study, the Persian version of the Security in the interparental subsystem scales has good reliability and validity in Iranian population and is a appropriate tool for clinical and research opportunities.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Emotional Security
  • Interparental system
  • reliability and Validity
منابع
قره‌باغی فاطمه، وفایی مریم، (1386). ایمنی هیجانی در خانواده و نشانه‌های آسیب‌شناختی روانی و سلامت کودک: بررسی نقش واسطه‌ای و تعدیل‌کننده خلق کودک.
مقدسین و اصغری مقدم. (2011). بررسی ساختار عاملی (تأییدی) نسخه فارسی پرسشنامه حالت-صفت بیان خشم STAXI-2 در جمعیت بالینی. فصلنامه اندازه‌گیری تربیتی، 1 (4)، 1-42.
References
Arrindell, W. A., Oei, T. P. S., Evans, L., & Van der Ende, J. (1991). Agoraphobic, animal, death-injury-illness and social stimuli clusters as major elements in a four-dimensional taxonomy of self-rated fears: First-order level confirmatory evidence from an Australian sample of anxiety disorder patients. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy, 13(4), 227-249.‏­
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance test and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
Blatz, W. E. (1966). Human security: Some reflections. University of Toronto Press.
Blunch, N. J. (2008). Introduction to structural equation modelling using SPSS and AMOS Thousand Oaks.‏
Browne, M. W &,.Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage focus editions, 154: pp. 136-162.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage focus editions, 154, 136-136.
Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming: Routledge.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate
 behavioral research1(2), 245-276
Clark, L. A., &Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309–319.
Corr, P. J. (2008). Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST): Introduction.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of applied psychology78(1), 98.‏
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.
Cummings, E. M. (1995). Usefulness of experiments for the study of the family. Journal of Family Psychology, 9(2), 175.
Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (2010). Marital conflict and children: An emotional security perspective. New York: Guilford
Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (2010). Marital conflict and children: An emotional security perspective. Guilford Press.
Davies, P. T., & Cummings, E. M. (1994). Marital conflict and child adjustment: An emotional security hypothesis. Psychological bulletin, 116(3), 387.
Davies, P. T., & Cummings, E. M. (1998). Exploring children's emotional security as a mediator of the link between marital relations and child adjustment. Child development, 69(1), 124-139.
Fincham, F. D., Grych, J. H., & Osborne, L. N. (1994). Does marital conflict cause child maladjustment? Directions and challenges for longitudinal research. Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 128–140.
Grych, J. H, Seid, M & Fincham, F. D, (1992). Assessing marital conflict from the child’s perspective: The Children’s Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale, Child Development, 63, 558-572.
Guttman, L. (1954). Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis. Psychometrika19(2), 149-161.‏
Helson, R., & Wink, P. (1987). Two conceptions of maturity examined in the findings of a longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 531.
Hennessy, K. D., Rabideau, G. J., Cicchetti, D., & Cummings, E. M. (1994). Responses of physically abused and nonabused children to different forms of interadult anger. Child development65(3), 815-828.‏
Hill, J. P., & Lynch, M. E. (1983). The intensification of gender-related role expectations during early adolescence. In Girls at puberty (pp. 201-228). Springer, Boston, MA.‏
Holt, T., Helland, M. S., Gustavson, K., Cummings, E. M., Ha, A., & Røysamb, E. (2020). Assessing Children’s Responses to Interparental Conflict: Validation and Short Scale Development of SIS and CPIC-Properties Scales. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology48(2), 177-196.‏
Jackson, D. L. (2003). Revisiting sample size and number of parameter estimates: Some support for the N: q hypothesis. Structural equation modeling, 10(1): pp. 128-141.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1988). LISREL VII: A guide to the program and applications. Chicago: SPSS.
Kaiser, H. F. (1961). A note on guttman's lower bound for the number of common factors 1. British Journal of Statistical Psychology14(1), 1-2.‏
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling: Guilford publications.
McQuitty, S. (2004). Statistical power and structural equation models in business research. Journal of Business Research, 57(2): pp. 175-183.
Olsson, U., Drasgow, F., & Dorans, N. J. (1982). The polyserial correlation coefficient. Psychometrika, 47(3): pp. 337-347.
Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Silva, A. D., Gao, M. M., Barni, D., Donato, S., Miller-Graff, L. E., & Cummings, E. M. (2020). Interparental Conflict on Italian Adolescent Adjustment: The Role of Insecurity within the Family. Journal of Family Issues, 0192513X20927749.‏
Silva, C. S., Calheiros, M. M., & Carvalho, H. (2016). Security in the Interparental Subsystem (SIS) scale: psychometric characteristics in a sample of Portuguese adolescents. Journal of family violence31(2), 147-159.‏
Swailes, S., & McIntyre-Bhatty, T. (2002). The BBelbin^ team role inventory: reinterpreting reliability estimates. Journal of ManagerialPsychology, 17(6), 529–536.
Thompson, R. A. (2000). The legacy of early attachments. Child development, 71(1), 145-152.
Zotova, O. Y. (2015). Emotional Security of People.