Dataset Information

The Pandemic Paranoia Scale (PPS): factor structure and measurement invariance across languages.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Globally, the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created an interpersonally threatening context within which other people have become a source of possible threat. This study reports on the development and validation of a self-report measure of pandemic paranoia; that is, heightened levels of suspicion and mistrust towards others due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

An international consortium developed an initial set of 28 items for the Pandemic Paranoia Scale (PPS), which were completed by participants from the UK (n = 512), USA (n = 535), Germany (n = 516), Hong Kong (n = 454) and Australia (n = 502) using stratified quota sampling (for age, sex and educational attainment) through Qualtrics and translated for Germany and Hong Kong.

Results

Exploratory factor analysis in the UK sample suggested a 25-item, three-factor solution (persecutory threat; paranoid conspiracy and interpersonal mistrust). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the remaining combined sample showed sufficient model fit in this independent set of data. Measurement invariance analyses suggested configural and metric invariance, but no scalar invariance across cultures/languages. A second-order factor CFA on the whole sample indicated that the three factors showed large loadings on a common second-order pandemic paranoia factor. Analyses also supported the test-retest reliability and internal and convergent validity.

Conclusion

The PPS offers an internationally validated and reliable method for assessing paranoia in the context of a pandemic. The PPS has the potential to enhance our understanding of the impact of the pandemic, the nature of paranoia and to assist in identifying and supporting people affected by pandemic-specific paranoia.

SUBMITTER: Kingston JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8712962 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Self-control is an important trait for humans to perceive inner and outer perceptions while maintaining harmony with others in society. People with lower self-control are more likely to engage in undesired or irresponsible behavior. The Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS) is an effective scale with a brief set of items which can effectively measure the level of an individual's control abilities. So far, it has been widely used in many longitudinal studies. However, the factor structure of the scale remains controversial, and far fewer studies have examined the longitudinal measurement invariance of the BSCS. This study aimed to revise the BSCS and test its factor structure for use in Chinese adolescents. Three samples of adolescents (N = 1,330/1,000/600, 11-19 years of age) were used. The item-total correlation and inter-item correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the quality of items. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and the principle component analysis (PCA) of the residuals were performed to test the factor structure of the BSCS. Three nested models were used to test the longitudinal measurement invariance (LMI) of the BSCS. Pearson correlation coefficient and Cronbach's alpha coefficient were conducted to test the criterion validity and internal consistency reliability, respectively. According to the CFA of different dimensional models of the BSCS, the results did not support the two-dimensional model, and poor factor loading was found for Item 12. Based on this, combined with lower item-total correlation and item-item correlations, Item 12 was eliminated. Based on results of the EFA with both Kaiser eigenvalues and minimum average partial correlations, only one factor of the revised 12-item BSCS was extracted to make the fit indices of the confirmatory factor analysis acceptable. Meanwhile, the results of principle component analysis of the residuals supported the unidimensional assumption. The fit indices of three nested models supported the longitudinal measurement invariance, indicating that this scale has the same meaning over time. The internal consistency coefficient of the BSCS-12 was 0.81 and the test-retest reliability was 0.70. Good concurrent validity was also demonstrated. Overall, these findings suggest that the revised 12-item Tangney's Brief Self-Control Scale has a one-dimensional structure and has good reliability and validity in Chinese adolescents.

Project description:We translated the Canadian residential long term care versions of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) and the Conceptual Research Utilization (CRU) Scale into German, to study the association between organizational context factors and research utilization in German nursing homes. The rigorous translation process was based on best practice guidelines for tool translation, and we previously published methods and results of this process in two papers. Both instruments are self-report questionnaires used with care providers working in nursing homes. The aim of this study was to assess the factor structure, reliability, and measurement invariance (MI) between care provider groups responding to these instruments. In a stratified random sample of 38 nursing homes in one German region (Metropolregion Rhein-Neckar), we collected questionnaires from 273 care aides, 196 regulated nurses, 152 allied health providers, 6 quality improvement specialists, 129 clinical leaders, and 65 nursing students. The factor structure was assessed using confirmatory factor models. The first model included all 10 ACT concepts. We also decided a priori to run two separate models for the scale-based and the count-based ACT concepts as suggested by the instrument developers. The fourth model included the five CRU Scale items. Reliability scores were calculated based on the parameters of the best-fitting factor models. Multiple-group confirmatory factor models were used to assess MI between provider groups. Rather than the hypothesized ten-factor structure of the ACT, confirmatory factor models suggested 13 factors. The one-factor solution of the CRU Scale was confirmed. The reliability was acceptable (>0.7 in the entire sample and in all provider groups) for 10 of 13 ACT concepts, and high (0.90-0.96) for the CRU Scale. We could demonstrate partial strong MI for both ACT models and partial strict MI for the CRU Scale. Our results suggest that the scores of the German ACT and the CRU Scale for nursing homes are acceptably reliable and valid. However, as the ACT lacked strict MI, observed variables (or scale scores based on them) cannot be compared between provider groups. Rather, group comparisons should be based on latent variable models, which consider the different residual variances of each group.