天真怀疑量表:应用于智利人口的开发和验证测试。

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica Pub Date : 2024-02-20 DOI:10.1186/s41155-024-00288-0
Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina, Yasna Ramírez, Patricio Mena-Chamorro, Marcos Carmona-Halty, Geraldy Sepúlveda-Páez
{"title":"天真怀疑量表:应用于智利人口的开发和验证测试。","authors":"Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina, Yasna Ramírez, Patricio Mena-Chamorro, Marcos Carmona-Halty, Geraldy Sepúlveda-Páez","doi":"10.1186/s41155-024-00288-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Skepticism has traditionally been associated with critical thinking. However, philosophy has proposed a particular type of skepticism, termed naive skepticism, which may increase susceptibility to misinformation, especially when contrasting information from official sources. While some scales propose to measure skepticism, they are scarce and only measure specific topics; thus, new instruments are needed to assess this construct.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to develop a scale to measure naive skepticism in the adult population.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The study involved 446 individuals from the adult population. Subjects were randomly selected for either the pilot study (phase 2; n = 126) or the validity-testing study (phase 3; n = 320). Parallel analyses and exploratory structural equation modelling were conducted to assess the internal structure of the test. Scale reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients Finally, a multigroup confirmatory factor analysis was performed to assess invariance, and a Set- Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling was applied to estimate evidence of validity based on associations with other variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The naive skepticism scale provided adequate levels of reliability (ω > 0.8), evidence of validity based on the internal structure of the test (CFI = 0.966; TLI = 0.951; RMSEA = 0.079), gender invariance, and a moderate inverse effect on attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The newly developed naive skepticism scale showed acceptable psychometric properties in an adult population, thus enabling the assessment of naive skepticism in similar demographics. This paper discusses the implications for the theoretical construct and possible limitations of the scale.</p>","PeriodicalId":46901,"journal":{"name":"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10879479/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Naive skepticism scale: development and validation tests applied to the chilean population.\",\"authors\":\"Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina, Yasna Ramírez, Patricio Mena-Chamorro, Marcos Carmona-Halty, Geraldy Sepúlveda-Páez\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41155-024-00288-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Skepticism has traditionally been associated with critical thinking. However, philosophy has proposed a particular type of skepticism, termed naive skepticism, which may increase susceptibility to misinformation, especially when contrasting information from official sources. While some scales propose to measure skepticism, they are scarce and only measure specific topics; thus, new instruments are needed to assess this construct.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to develop a scale to measure naive skepticism in the adult population.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The study involved 446 individuals from the adult population. Subjects were randomly selected for either the pilot study (phase 2; n = 126) or the validity-testing study (phase 3; n = 320). Parallel analyses and exploratory structural equation modelling were conducted to assess the internal structure of the test. Scale reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients Finally, a multigroup confirmatory factor analysis was performed to assess invariance, and a Set- Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling was applied to estimate evidence of validity based on associations with other variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The naive skepticism scale provided adequate levels of reliability (ω > 0.8), evidence of validity based on the internal structure of the test (CFI = 0.966; TLI = 0.951; RMSEA = 0.079), gender invariance, and a moderate inverse effect on attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The newly developed naive skepticism scale showed acceptable psychometric properties in an adult population, thus enabling the assessment of naive skepticism in similar demographics. This paper discusses the implications for the theoretical construct and possible limitations of the scale.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10879479/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-024-00288-0\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-024-00288-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:怀疑论历来与批判性思维相关。然而,哲学提出了一种特殊类型的怀疑主义,即天真怀疑主义,这种怀疑主义可能会增加对错误信息的易感性,尤其是在对比官方来源的信息时。虽然有一些量表提出要测量怀疑主义,但这些量表很少,而且只能测量特定的主题;因此,需要新的工具来评估这一构造:本研究旨在开发一个量表来测量成年人的天真怀疑态度:研究涉及 446 名成年人。受试者被随机选入试验研究(第二阶段;n = 126)或有效性测试研究(第三阶段;n = 320)。为了评估测试的内部结构,我们进行了平行分析和探索性结构方程建模。最后,进行了多组确认性因素分析,以评估不变性,并应用集合探索性结构方程模型,根据与其他变量的关联来估计效度证据:结果:天真怀疑量表具有足够的信度(ω > 0.8)、基于测试内部结构的效度证据(CFI = 0.966;TLI = 0.951;RMSEA = 0.079)、性别不变性以及对 COVID-19 疫苗态度的适度反向影响:结论:新开发的天真怀疑主义量表在成人人群中显示出了可接受的心理测量特性,因此可以对类似人群的天真怀疑主义进行评估。本文讨论了该量表对理论构建的影响以及可能存在的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Naive skepticism scale: development and validation tests applied to the chilean population.

Background: Skepticism has traditionally been associated with critical thinking. However, philosophy has proposed a particular type of skepticism, termed naive skepticism, which may increase susceptibility to misinformation, especially when contrasting information from official sources. While some scales propose to measure skepticism, they are scarce and only measure specific topics; thus, new instruments are needed to assess this construct.

Objective: This study aimed to develop a scale to measure naive skepticism in the adult population.

Method: The study involved 446 individuals from the adult population. Subjects were randomly selected for either the pilot study (phase 2; n = 126) or the validity-testing study (phase 3; n = 320). Parallel analyses and exploratory structural equation modelling were conducted to assess the internal structure of the test. Scale reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients Finally, a multigroup confirmatory factor analysis was performed to assess invariance, and a Set- Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling was applied to estimate evidence of validity based on associations with other variables.

Results: The naive skepticism scale provided adequate levels of reliability (ω > 0.8), evidence of validity based on the internal structure of the test (CFI = 0.966; TLI = 0.951; RMSEA = 0.079), gender invariance, and a moderate inverse effect on attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines.

Conclusions: The newly developed naive skepticism scale showed acceptable psychometric properties in an adult population, thus enabling the assessment of naive skepticism in similar demographics. This paper discusses the implications for the theoretical construct and possible limitations of the scale.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica
Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Psicologia: Reflexão & Crítica is a journal published three times a year by Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia do Desenvolvimento (Psychology Graduate Program) of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - UFRGS (Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul). Its objective is to publish original works in the psychology field: articles, short reports on research and reviews as well as to present to the scientific community texts which reflect a significant contribution for the psychology field. The short title of the journal is Psicol. Refl. Crít. It must be used regarding bibliographies, footnotes, as well as bibliographical strips and references.
期刊最新文献
Morpho-orthographic segmentation on visual word recognition in Brazilian Portuguese speakers. The gaming disorder test and gaming disorder scale for adolescents: translation and validation among Vietnamese young adults. Adaptation of the normative rating procedure for the International Affective Picture System to a remote format. Psychometric properties of the Parenting Stress Index-Short Form in a Peruvian sample. Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of human-robot interaction self-efficacy scale in Chinese adults.
×
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