The validity and reliability of the hungarian version of the brief work-family conflict questionnaire – an effective method to measure work-to-family and family-to-work conflict

Q2 Social Sciences Interpersona Pub Date : 2022-06-28 DOI:10.5964/ijpr.6309

V. Mészáros, Zsuzsanna Kövi, Àngel Blanch, A. Ferenczi, Z. Tanyi, Virág Karai, J. Hittner, B. Kulig, D. Kovács, Máté Smohai, S. Ádám

{"title":"The validity and reliability of the hungarian version of the brief work-family conflict questionnaire – an effective method to measure work-to-family and family-to-work conflict","authors":"V. Mészáros, Zsuzsanna Kövi, Àngel Blanch, A. Ferenczi, Z. Tanyi, Virág Karai, J. Hittner, B. Kulig, D. Kovács, Máté Smohai, S. Ádám","doi":"10.5964/ijpr.6309","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current study aimed to investigate the validity and reliability of the Hungarian version of the brief Work-Family Conflict Questionnaire (Conflicto Trabajo – Familia, CCTF) using both homogeneous (social care workers, N = 206) and heterogeneous (N = 586) occupational samples. In order to examine construct validity, we explored both two-factor and bifactor models. Our findings provided greater support for the two-factor model (homogeneous sample: χ2 = 14.032, p = .379, df = 13; CFI = 0.999; NNFI = 0.998; RMSEA = 0.020 [0.000–0.051]; heterogeneous sample: χ2 = 40.213, p < .001 df = 13; CFI = 0.993; NNFI = 0.985; RMSEA = 0.060 [0.023–0.079]). Our results demonstrated good reliability (ω = 0.797–0.911) and predictive validity, which we tested by exploring the relation of the construct with burnout and psychosomatic symptoms. Our results suggest that the Hungarian version of the CCTF is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring both work-to-family and family-to-work conflict.","PeriodicalId":37776,"journal":{"name":"Interpersona","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interpersona","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5964/ijpr.6309","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

The current study aimed to investigate the validity and reliability of the Hungarian version of the brief Work-Family Conflict Questionnaire (Conflicto Trabajo – Familia, CCTF) using both homogeneous (social care workers, N = 206) and heterogeneous (N = 586) occupational samples. In order to examine construct validity, we explored both two-factor and bifactor models. Our findings provided greater support for the two-factor model (homogeneous sample: χ2 = 14.032, p = .379, df = 13; CFI = 0.999; NNFI = 0.998; RMSEA = 0.020 [0.000–0.051]; heterogeneous sample: χ2 = 40.213, p < .001 df = 13; CFI = 0.993; NNFI = 0.985; RMSEA = 0.060 [0.023–0.079]). Our results demonstrated good reliability (ω = 0.797–0.911) and predictive validity, which we tested by exploring the relation of the construct with burnout and psychosomatic symptoms. Our results suggest that the Hungarian version of the CCTF is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring both work-to-family and family-to-work conflict.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

匈牙利版工作-家庭冲突简要问卷的效度和信度——一种测量工作-家庭和家庭-工作冲突的有效方法

本研究旨在调查匈牙利版工作-家庭冲突问卷(Conflicto Trabajo - Familia, CCTF)的效度和信度，使用同质(社会护理工作者，N = 206)和异质(N = 586)职业样本。为了检验结构效度，我们探索了双因素和双因素模型。我们的研究结果为双因素模型提供了更大的支持(均匀样本:χ2 = 14.032, p = 0.379, df = 13;Cfi = 0.999;Nnfi = 0.998;Rmsea = 0.020 [0.000-0.051];异质性样本:χ2 = 40.213, p < 0.001 df = 13;Cfi = 0.993;Nnfi = 0.985;Rmsea = 0.060[0.023-0.079])。我们的研究结果显示了良好的信度(ω = 0.797-0.911)和预测效度，我们通过探索结构与倦怠和心身症状的关系来检验。我们的研究结果表明，匈牙利版本的CCTF是一个可靠和有效的工具来衡量工作对家庭和家庭对工作的冲突。

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

Interpersona Social Sciences-Cultural Studies

CiteScore

1.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

38 weeks

期刊介绍： 1) Interpersona aims at promoting scholarship in the field of interpersonal relationships based on different methodologies and stemming from several disciplines, including Psychology, Family Studies, Sociology, Anthropology, Communication Studies, Economics, Management Science, Biology, Health Sciences, History, and others. Interpersona aims at contributing to the collective construction of an Interpersonal Relationship Science. 2) Manuscripts examining a wide range of relationships, including close or intimate relationships and weak or temporary ties, are welcome. Some examples are indicated below: Biology - Biological foundations of human relationships: physiological and neurobiological phenomena related to interpersonal interactions. The evolutionary foundations of interpersonal relationships including comparative and animal studies of social interactions. Psychology and Family Studies: close or intimate relations including romantic relationships, family relationships and friendship. Family relationships encompass spouses, parents and children, siblings, and other relations among nuclear and extended family members.[...] 3) In addition to original empirical (qualitative or quantitative) research, theoretical or methodological contributions, integrative reviews, meta-analyses, comparative or historical studies, and critical assessments of the status of the field are welcome as submissions. 4) Interpersona is a totally free access journal and readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles without any charge. All papers are peer-reviewed by members of the editorial board or ad-hoc reviewers under the supervision of an editor. [...] 5) All Interpersona content is available in full text with no charge. All submitted papers are reviewed by at least two referees before being accepted for publication.