Cargando…

A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

OBJECTIVE: The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a widely used instrument that has been tested for reliability and validity in many settings; however, some negative-worded items appear to have caused it to reveal low reliability in a number of studies. In this study, we revised one negative item...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tinakon, Wongpakaran, Nahathai, Wongpakaran
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Neuropsychiatric Association 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3285741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22396685
http://dx.doi.org/10.4306/pi.2012.9.1.54
_version_ 1782224517836308480
author Tinakon, Wongpakaran
Nahathai, Wongpakaran
author_facet Tinakon, Wongpakaran
Nahathai, Wongpakaran
author_sort Tinakon, Wongpakaran
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a widely used instrument that has been tested for reliability and validity in many settings; however, some negative-worded items appear to have caused it to reveal low reliability in a number of studies. In this study, we revised one negative item that had previously (from the previous studies) produced the worst outcome in terms of the structure of the scale, then re-analyzed the new version for its reliability and construct validity, comparing it to the original version with respect to fit indices. METHODS: In total, 851 students from Chiang Mai University (mean age: 19.51±1.7, 57% of whom were female), participated in this study. Of these, 664 students completed the Thai version of the original RSES - containing five positively worded and five negatively worded items, while 187 students used the revised version containing six positively worded and four negatively worded items. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied, using a uni-dimensional model with method effects and a correlated uniqueness approach. RESULTS: The revised version showed the same level of reliability (good) as the original, but yielded a better model fit. The revised RSES demonstrated excellent fit statistics, with χ(2)=29.19 (df=19, n=187, p=0.063), GFI=0.970, TFI=0.969, NFI=0.964, CFI=0.987, SRMR=0.040 and RMSEA=0.054. CONCLUSION: The revised version of the Thai RSES demonstrated an equivalent level of reliability but a better construct validity when compared to the original.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3285741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Korean Neuropsychiatric Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32857412012-03-07 A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale Tinakon, Wongpakaran Nahathai, Wongpakaran Psychiatry Investig Original Article OBJECTIVE: The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a widely used instrument that has been tested for reliability and validity in many settings; however, some negative-worded items appear to have caused it to reveal low reliability in a number of studies. In this study, we revised one negative item that had previously (from the previous studies) produced the worst outcome in terms of the structure of the scale, then re-analyzed the new version for its reliability and construct validity, comparing it to the original version with respect to fit indices. METHODS: In total, 851 students from Chiang Mai University (mean age: 19.51±1.7, 57% of whom were female), participated in this study. Of these, 664 students completed the Thai version of the original RSES - containing five positively worded and five negatively worded items, while 187 students used the revised version containing six positively worded and four negatively worded items. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied, using a uni-dimensional model with method effects and a correlated uniqueness approach. RESULTS: The revised version showed the same level of reliability (good) as the original, but yielded a better model fit. The revised RSES demonstrated excellent fit statistics, with χ(2)=29.19 (df=19, n=187, p=0.063), GFI=0.970, TFI=0.969, NFI=0.964, CFI=0.987, SRMR=0.040 and RMSEA=0.054. CONCLUSION: The revised version of the Thai RSES demonstrated an equivalent level of reliability but a better construct validity when compared to the original. Korean Neuropsychiatric Association 2012-03 2012-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3285741/ /pubmed/22396685 http://dx.doi.org/10.4306/pi.2012.9.1.54 Text en Copyright © 2012 Korean Neuropsychiatric Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Tinakon, Wongpakaran
Nahathai, Wongpakaran
A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
title A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
title_full A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
title_fullStr A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
title_short A Comparison of Reliability and Construct Validity between the Original and Revised Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
title_sort comparison of reliability and construct validity between the original and revised versions of the rosenberg self-esteem scale
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3285741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22396685
http://dx.doi.org/10.4306/pi.2012.9.1.54
work_keys_str_mv AT tinakonwongpakaran acomparisonofreliabilityandconstructvaliditybetweentheoriginalandrevisedversionsoftherosenbergselfesteemscale
AT nahathaiwongpakaran acomparisonofreliabilityandconstructvaliditybetweentheoriginalandrevisedversionsoftherosenbergselfesteemscale
AT tinakonwongpakaran comparisonofreliabilityandconstructvaliditybetweentheoriginalandrevisedversionsoftherosenbergselfesteemscale
AT nahathaiwongpakaran comparisonofreliabilityandconstructvaliditybetweentheoriginalandrevisedversionsoftherosenbergselfesteemscale