Measurement Invariance of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Subscale Between Individuals With Psychiatric and Non-psychiatric Disabilities.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Evaluation & the Health Professions Pub Date : 2025-03-17 DOI:10.1177/01632787251327681
Heerak Choi, Aaron J Kaat
{"title":"Measurement Invariance of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Subscale Between Individuals With Psychiatric and Non-psychiatric Disabilities.","authors":"Heerak Choi, Aaron J Kaat","doi":"10.1177/01632787251327681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to examine the measurement invariance of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Subscale (BPNSS) and compare the latent factor means of basic psychological needs between individuals with psychiatric and non-psychiatric disabilities. This cross-sectional study included 97 individuals with psychiatric and 102 individuals with non-psychiatric disabilities. Prior to comparing scores on basic psychological needs across these groups, we evaluated the measure invariance of the BPNSS and confirmed scalar invariance. Individuals with psychiatric disabilities had significantly lower autonomy scores than those with non-psychiatric disabilities. There were no significant mean differences in competence and relatedness between the groups. These findings suggest wide applicability of the BPNSS across individuals with psychiatric and non-psychiatric disabilities. Practitioners should support individuals with psychiatric disabilities to improve their autonomy. Replication with large, diverse samples is crucial to validate the findings and investigate intragroup variances.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"1632787251327681"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787251327681","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the measurement invariance of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Subscale (BPNSS) and compare the latent factor means of basic psychological needs between individuals with psychiatric and non-psychiatric disabilities. This cross-sectional study included 97 individuals with psychiatric and 102 individuals with non-psychiatric disabilities. Prior to comparing scores on basic psychological needs across these groups, we evaluated the measure invariance of the BPNSS and confirmed scalar invariance. Individuals with psychiatric disabilities had significantly lower autonomy scores than those with non-psychiatric disabilities. There were no significant mean differences in competence and relatedness between the groups. These findings suggest wide applicability of the BPNSS across individuals with psychiatric and non-psychiatric disabilities. Practitioners should support individuals with psychiatric disabilities to improve their autonomy. Replication with large, diverse samples is crucial to validate the findings and investigate intragroup variances.

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
精神障碍与非精神障碍个体基本心理需求满足子量表的测量不变性。
本研究旨在检验基本心理需求满足量表(BPNSS)的测量不变性,并比较精神障碍和非精神障碍个体基本心理需求的潜在因素手段。这项横断面研究包括97名精神障碍患者和102名非精神障碍患者。在比较各组基本心理需求得分之前,我们评估了BPNSS的测量不变性,并确认了标量不变性。精神障碍患者的自主性得分明显低于非精神障碍患者。两组之间的能力和亲缘关系没有显著的平均差异。这些发现表明BPNSS在精神和非精神残疾个体中广泛适用。从业者应该支持精神障碍患者提高他们的自主性。大量不同样本的复制对于验证研究结果和调查组内差异至关重要。
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
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evaluation & the Health Professions is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that provides health-related professionals with state-of-the-art methodological, measurement, and statistical tools for conceptualizing the etiology of health promotion and problems, and developing, implementing, and evaluating health programs, teaching and training services, and products that pertain to a myriad of health dimensions. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 31 days
期刊最新文献
Cross-National Validation of a Health-Related Quality of Life Measure in Five Latin American Countries: Invariance of the 8-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-8) and Proposed 6-Item Version (SF-6). Oncology Surgeons' Work Motivation, Organizational Cynicism, and Risk Factors: Associations With Patient Mortality Incidence Rates. Combining Business Education With Clinical Acumen … is it Necessary? A Systematic Review: What Are the Impacts of Receiving Extrinsic Feedback on Health Professions Students in Higher Education? Factors Influencing the Translation of Evidence Into Clinical Practice for Hospital Allied Health Professionals in Terms of the Domains of Behaviour Change Theory: A Systematic Review.
×
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:604180095
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