期刊文献+

农民工城市认同问卷的编制与信效度分析 被引量:10

Development of Migrant Workers' Urban Identity Scale and Its Reliability,Validity
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的编制农民工城市认同问卷,提供评价农民工城市认同度的有效测量工具。方法在文献分析的基础上,将农民工城市认同分为地域认同、群体认同和态度认同3个维度,并在开放式调查和专家评估基础上形成23题的初测问卷,对284名农民工进行施测,通过项目分析和因素分析形成16题的正式问卷。结果探索性因素分析表明问卷的3个维度,可解释总变异的48.42%,验证性因素分析中,χ2/df=2.314,RSMEA=0.071,NFI=0.842,CFI=0.902,TLI=0.900,GFI=0.903,拟合指标良好,表明问卷具有良好的结构效度;地域认同、态度认同、群体认同3个维度间的内部一致性系数分别为0.871、0.683、0.629,分半信度分别为0.874、0.563、0.691。结论该问卷具有良好的信效度,可作为测量农民工城市认同度的有效工具。 Objective To develop migrant workers' urban identity questionnaire,and provide effective measurements for migrant workers' urban identity.Methods Migrant workers' urban identity was described by regional identity,group identity and attitude identity.23 items preliminary questionnaire was created.Data were gathered from 284 migrant workers.Exploratory factor analysis was used to form 16 items formal questionnaire.Results Exploratory factor analysis showed that three dimensions could explain 48.42% variances;Confirmatory factor analysis,χ2/df=2.314,RSMEA=0.071,NFI=0.842,CFI=0.902,TLI=0.900,GFI=0.903 fitting index were good,which showed that the structure of the questionnaire had good validity;Cronbach alpha coefficient of these three dimensions were 0.871,0.683 and 0.629.half reliability of the three dimensions were 0.874,0.563 and 0.691.Conclusion Questionnaire has effective validity and reliability,and can be used as an effective tool in evaluating migrant workers' urban identity.
作者 杨健 李辉
出处 《中国健康心理学杂志》 2012年第2期313-314,共2页 China Journal of Health Psychology
基金 国家社科基金西部项目(08XZX011)-新农村建设中农民的社会心理问题研究-以云南 河南为例成果的一部分
关键词 农民工 城市认同 信度 效度 Migrant workers Urban identity Reliability Validity
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献30

  • 1[1]Tucker L R, Lewis C. The reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1973, 38: 1~10
  • 2[2]Steiger J H, Lind J M. Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Psychometrika Society Meeting, IowaCity, May, 1980
  • 3[3]Bentler P M, Bonett D G. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 1980, 88: 588~ 606
  • 4[4]Bentler P M. Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin,1990, 107: 238~ 246
  • 5[5]McDonald R P, Marsh H W. Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness-of-fit. Psychological Bulletin, 1990,107: 247~ 255
  • 6[6]Marsh H W, Balla J R, Hau K T. An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In: Marcoulides G A, Schumacker R E eds. Advanced structural equation modeling techniques. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1996. 315~ 353
  • 7[7]Browne M W, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen K A, Long J S eds. Testing Structural Equation Models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993. 136~ 162
  • 8[8]Joreskog K G, Srbom D. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International, 1993
  • 9[9]Hu L, Bentler P M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 1998, 3: 424~ 453
  • 10[10]Hu L, Bentler P M. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 1999, 6: 1~ 55

共引文献1249

同被引文献106

引证文献10

二级引证文献35

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部