Factor and subscale structure of a parental health locus of control instrument (Parental Health Beliefs Scales) for use in a mainland United States Puerto Rican community
This study was undertaken to determine whether the subscale structure of an instrument used to measure parental health locus of control is a valid representation of the concept of locus of control in the Puerto Rican community. Ethnocultural differences in values and attitudes may create different conceptualizations of questionnaire items, which may impact on the subscale factor loadings for these items. Four hundred and twenty parents of Puerto Rican ethnicity living in a mainland inner city community in the United States completed the Parental Health Beliefs Scales (PHBS) instrument, which was developed to measure parental locus of control regarding their children's health. Results were subject to exploratory factor analysis. The resultant factor structure was then compared to other published factor structures by confirmatory factor analysis. Exploratory factor analysis results show a new five factor solution. Compared to two previously published factor structures for this instrument, the new five factor structure has a better goodness of fit for this Puerto Rican study sample. Through item analysis, we were able to refine the final structure into a four factor, 15 item instrument. We conclude that the new factor structure for the PHBS creates an instrument with subscales that reflect Puerto Rican cultural beliefs and values, especially as it pertains to locus of control issues (e.g. respect of professionals, collectivism, and the importance of fate). When working with ethnocultural minority groups, the health services researcher needs to be certain that the research instruments used are culturally appropriate and sensitive.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 50 (2000)
Issue (Month): 5 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:50:y:2000:i:5:p:715-721. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.