Anonymous Versus Self-Identified Response Formats for School Mental Health Screening

IF 1.2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION Pub Date : 2020-09-30 DOI:10.1177/1534508420959439
Rhea Wagle, E. Dowdy, M. Furlong, Karen Nylund-Gibson, D. Carter, T. Hinton
{"title":"Anonymous Versus Self-Identified Response Formats for School Mental Health Screening","authors":"Rhea Wagle, E. Dowdy, M. Furlong, Karen Nylund-Gibson, D. Carter, T. Hinton","doi":"10.1177/1534508420959439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Schools are an essential setting for mental health supports and services for students. To support student well-being, schools engage in universal mental health screening to identify students in need of support and to provide surveillance data for district-wide or state-wide policy changes. Mental health data have been collected via anonymous and self-identified response formats depending on the purpose of the screening (i.e., surveillance and screening, respectively). However, most surveys do not provide psychometric evidence for use in both types of response formats. The current study examined whether responses to the Social Emotional Health Survey–Secondary (SEHS-S), a school mental health survey, are comparable when administered using anonymous versus self-identified response formats. The study participants were from one high school and completed the SEHS-S using self-identified (n = 1,700) and anonymous (n = 1,667) formats. Full measurement invariance was found across the two response formats. Both substantial and minimal latent mean differences were detected. Implications for the use and interpretation of the SEHS-S for schoolwide mental health are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46264,"journal":{"name":"ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION","volume":"47 1","pages":"112 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1534508420959439","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508420959439","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Schools are an essential setting for mental health supports and services for students. To support student well-being, schools engage in universal mental health screening to identify students in need of support and to provide surveillance data for district-wide or state-wide policy changes. Mental health data have been collected via anonymous and self-identified response formats depending on the purpose of the screening (i.e., surveillance and screening, respectively). However, most surveys do not provide psychometric evidence for use in both types of response formats. The current study examined whether responses to the Social Emotional Health Survey–Secondary (SEHS-S), a school mental health survey, are comparable when administered using anonymous versus self-identified response formats. The study participants were from one high school and completed the SEHS-S using self-identified (n = 1,700) and anonymous (n = 1,667) formats. Full measurement invariance was found across the two response formats. Both substantial and minimal latent mean differences were detected. Implications for the use and interpretation of the SEHS-S for schoolwide mental health are discussed.
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
学校心理健康筛查的匿名与自我识别反应形式
学校是为学生提供心理健康支持和服务的重要场所。为了支持学生的福祉,学校进行普遍的心理健康筛查,以确定需要支持的学生,并为全区或全州的政策变化提供监测数据。心理健康数据是通过匿名和自我识别的响应格式收集的,具体取决于筛查的目的(即分别进行监测和筛查)。然而,大多数调查并没有提供在这两种类型的回答形式中使用的心理测量证据。目前的研究调查了使用匿名和自我识别的回答形式进行的对学校心理健康调查——中等社会情绪健康调查(SEHS-S)的回答是否具有可比性。研究参与者来自一所高中,使用自我识别(n=1700)和匿名(n=1667)格式完成了SEHS-S。在两种响应格式中发现了完全的测量不变性。检测到实质性和最小潜在平均值差异。讨论了SEHS-S的使用和解释对学校心理健康的影响。
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
ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION
ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Reliability of Ratings of an English Language Arts Curriculum With the Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines What Is Important to Measure in Sentence-Level Language Comprehension? Universal Screening for Student Mental Health: Selection of Norming Group Validation of the Youth Internalizing Problem Screener in Singapore Using Empirical Information to Prioritize Early Literacy Assessment and Instruction in Preschool and Kindergarten
×
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