The Internal Consistency of the Moral Injury Event Scale

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED European Journal of Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2024-04-15 DOI:10.1027/1015-5759/a000824
S. Steen, G. U. Law, Chris Jones
{"title":"The Internal Consistency of the Moral Injury Event Scale","authors":"S. Steen, G. U. Law, Chris Jones","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The Moral Injury Event Scale (MIES) is a tool for measuring exposure to potentially morally injurious event(s) and distress. Although it reported acceptable psychometric properties in its initial development studies, it has since been used in multiple contexts and populations without assessment of its changing properties. A reliability generalization of the MIES and its Sub-Scales was therefore undertaken. A systematic search of electronic databases (PsychINFO; PTSD Pubs; MEDLINE; Scopus; Web of Science) identified 42 studies reporting internal consistencies (Cronbach’s α) up to April 2022. Unfortunately, few studies reported any other form of reliability or validity metric (e.g., test-retest, inter-rater reliability). A random effects model with a Bayesian analytic framework and the DerSimonian-Laird (1986) estimate was used. The review found the MIES to be an internally consistent tool based on α estimates at both Full-scale (α = .88; 95% CI [.87–.89]) and Sub-scales (α = .82–.92; 95% CI [.79–.93]). The review uncovered high heterogeneity and inconsistencies in its administration and modification although figures generally remained above acceptable levels (α ≥ .70). Based on the review, the MIES represents an internally reliably tool for measuring potentially morally injurious events and distress at both Full and Sub-Scales according to pooled Cronbach’s α estimates.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000824","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: The Moral Injury Event Scale (MIES) is a tool for measuring exposure to potentially morally injurious event(s) and distress. Although it reported acceptable psychometric properties in its initial development studies, it has since been used in multiple contexts and populations without assessment of its changing properties. A reliability generalization of the MIES and its Sub-Scales was therefore undertaken. A systematic search of electronic databases (PsychINFO; PTSD Pubs; MEDLINE; Scopus; Web of Science) identified 42 studies reporting internal consistencies (Cronbach’s α) up to April 2022. Unfortunately, few studies reported any other form of reliability or validity metric (e.g., test-retest, inter-rater reliability). A random effects model with a Bayesian analytic framework and the DerSimonian-Laird (1986) estimate was used. The review found the MIES to be an internally consistent tool based on α estimates at both Full-scale (α = .88; 95% CI [.87–.89]) and Sub-scales (α = .82–.92; 95% CI [.79–.93]). The review uncovered high heterogeneity and inconsistencies in its administration and modification although figures generally remained above acceptable levels (α ≥ .70). Based on the review, the MIES represents an internally reliably tool for measuring potentially morally injurious events and distress at both Full and Sub-Scales according to pooled Cronbach’s α estimates.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
道德伤害事件量表的内部一致性
摘要:道德伤害事件量表(MIES)是一种用于测量暴露于潜在道德伤害事件和痛苦的工具。尽管该量表在最初的开发研究中报告了可接受的心理测量特性,但此后该量表在多种环境和人群中使用,却没有对其变化特性进行评估。因此,我们对 MIES 及其子量表进行了可靠性归纳。通过对电子数据库(PsychINFO;PTSD Pubs;MEDLINE;Scopus;Web of Science)进行系统性检索,发现截至 2022 年 4 月有 42 项研究报告了内部一致性(克朗巴赫α)。遗憾的是,只有极少数研究报告了其他形式的信度或效度指标(如测试-再测试、评分者之间的信度)。研究采用了贝叶斯分析框架下的随机效应模型和 DerSimonian-Laird(1986 年)估计值。根据全量表(α = .88;95% CI [.87-.89])和子量表(α = .82-.92;95% CI [.79-.93])的α估计值,综述发现 MIES 是一个内部一致的工具。尽管数据总体上仍高于可接受的水平(α ≥ .70),但审查发现了其管理和修改方面的高度异质性和不一致性。综上所述,根据汇总的 Cronbach's α 估计值,MIES 是一种内部可靠的工具,可用于测量全量表和分量表的潜在道德伤害事件和痛苦。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.
期刊最新文献
Trait- and State-Aspects of Procrastination and Their Relation to Study Satisfaction How Happy Is Happy Enough? The Internal Consistency of the Moral Injury Event Scale Heterogeneity of Alexithymia Subgroups A Persian Validation of the Occupational Depression Inventory
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1