Search

The Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ) is a well-established tool used to assess parental beliefs, attitudes, and child feeding practices, with a focus on childhood obesity proneness. To date, there is no French version of the CFQ, nor any Canadian studies assessing its construct validity. The aim of this study was to assess the construct validity and the reliability of a French version of the CFQ among Black mothers (n = 136) of school-aged children living in Ottawa (Canada). The final best fitting model included 7 factors, 20 items, and 1 error covariance. This model was retained as the final model as it (1) excluded two items with very low factor loadings; (2) had the lowest χ2, AIC, BIC, RMSEA, and SRMR values; and (3) had CFI and TLI values ≥ 0.95. Internal consistency ranged from poor to good; the restriction subscale had the lowest internal consistency, followed by the perceived responsibility, pressure to eat, perceive child weight, concern about child weight, and monitoring scales, respectively. Our results showed that a seven-factor model with minor modifications was best fitted to the current data. Future studies are needed to test the validity and reliability of the CFQ in other population groups and among fathers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The evaluation of teaching effectiveness in blended learning methodologies is usually carried out using Likert-type questionnaires; however, instruments with Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are sometimes employed for this purpose. This paper examines the validity and reliability of an instrument with BARS designed to assess teaching effectiveness in blended learning environments, within the university setting. The research involves a sample of 1436 students from a medium size university in Spain. Using this sample (n = 1436), the authors carry out a psychometric study that consists of four phases: (1) comprehension validity analysis, (2) construct validity analysis, (3) confirmation of construct validity, and (4) analysis of the instrument reliability. The findings provide satisfactory values for all the parameters analyzed (for instance: Variance explained = 77.61%; RMSEA = 0.042; or Cronbach's alpha = 0.956), indicating that the BARS instrument examined is perfectly valid and reliable for the appraisal of teaching effectiveness in blended learning methodologies. The authors conclude that this paper fills an important gap in the literature by presenting an instrument that, thanks to the use of behavioral scales, facilitates this task in the university context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The present study investigates the reliability and validity of the Positive–Negative Relationship Quality (PN-RQ) scale in Turkey. This study aims to test different factorial models including orthogonal factors model, correlated factors model, one-factor model, and bifactor model. Methods: In order to determine the validity and reliability of the scale, two studies were performed. The first was carried out with emerging adults (university students) who were in a romantic relationship (148 females, 43 males, and 2 unknown) and had the main purpose to examine the structure validity of the measurement tool in the Turkish sample with an exploratory analysis. Study 2 was performed online with 513 married adults (359 females, 149 males, and 5 unknown); confirmatory findings and criterion validity studies were added. Results: Exploratory factor analyses revealed that relationship quality had a two-factor structure and that there was also a negative relationship between the factors. Confirmatory factor analyses on the married sample showed that the bi-factor model provided evidence for the multidimensional nature of the scale. Both studies demonstrated high internal consistency. Conclusion: There is evidence for reliability and validity in the Turkish version of the PN-RQ scale to measure both positive and negative aspects of the relationship. The PN-RQ scale will be highly functional for social and clinical psychologists who work on close relationship issues in Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]