Frontiers in psychology · 2025
Development and validation of the pandemic fear perception and adaptability scale.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Mu, Qi Haiyan, Chen Yanyan, Li Mian
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Individuals exhibit specific behavioral responses to fear and stress. The Pandemic Fear Perception and Adaptability Scale (PFPA) is a novel instrument designed to assess fear perception and behavioral adaptability in the context of pandemics.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 923 participants in China to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PFPA. After expert review, a 7-item scale was developed, comprising three subscales: self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility, and perceived threat. Classical test theory, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch modeling were used to assess the scale's reliability and validity.
RESULTS: The PFPA demonstrated good reliability, with an internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.700) and test-retest reliability (ICC(2,1) = 0.781, p < 0.001). Evidence of validity was supported by an average variance extracted of 0.563 and a composite reliability of 0.898. CFA indicated excellent model fit (χ²(11) =15.123, p = 0.177; CFI = 0.998, GFI = 0.995, TLI = 0.995, RMSEA = 0.020). Differential item functioning analysis showed minimal bias across gender and age.
DISCUSSION: This study establishes the PFPA as a reliable and valid tool for assessing fear perception and behavioral adaptability, with potential to evaluate these constructs in other pandemic contexts. Given its initial development in a Chinese context, future research should examine its applicability across diverse cultural and linguistic settings.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 923 participants in China to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PFPA. After expert review, a 7-item scale was developed, comprising three subscales: self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility, and perceived threat. Classical test theory, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch modeling were used to assess the scale's reliability and validity.
RESULTS: The PFPA demonstrated good reliability, with an internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.700) and test-retest reliability (ICC(2,1) = 0.781, p < 0.001). Evidence of validity was supported by an average variance extracted of 0.563 and a composite reliability of 0.898. CFA indicated excellent model fit (χ²(11) =15.123, p = 0.177; CFI = 0.998, GFI = 0.995, TLI = 0.995, RMSEA = 0.020). Differential item functioning analysis showed minimal bias across gender and age.
DISCUSSION: This study establishes the PFPA as a reliable and valid tool for assessing fear perception and behavioral adaptability, with potential to evaluate these constructs in other pandemic contexts. Given its initial development in a Chinese context, future research should examine its applicability across diverse cultural and linguistic settings.