A study on validity and reliability of COVID-19 anxiety scale

Öz

This study is aimed to develop the anxiety scale toward novel corona virus in Turkish public. The online questionnaire surveyed 1075 individuals from the general population of 70 provinces of Turkey who completed the questionnaire via social networks from May 1 to June 15, 2020. Two different samples were used in this study. In first step, 415 data were collected in second step 649 data was obtained for confirmatory factor analysis. A series of exploratory factor analyses were conducted on data obtained from the first sample. As a result of the exploratory factor analysis, 9 items were removed from the scale consisting of 17 items. The final COVID-19 Anxiety Scale consisting of two factors, which are Overreaction and Overprotection- Hygiene, and eight items, have been found as capable to measure the anxiety towards COVID-19. The construct validity of the COVID-19 Anxiety Scale, revealed by exploratory factor analysis, was tested with the confirmatory factor analysis applied to the second sample data. Accordingly, it has been revealed that the two-factor construct of the COVID-19 Anxiety Scale ensures a perfectly model-data fit. Another validity study is the determination of measurement invariance in gender groups of the Covid-19 Anxiety Scale. The results show that metric invariance was provided. Thus, factor variances and structural relationships between groups are comparable. The convergent validity of the scale was examined through item loadings, composite reliability, and average variance extracted values. All of them provide critical values for convergent validity. Since the correlation between the factors was lower than the average variance extracted by the factors, the discriminate validity of the scale was also provided. The reliability of the scale was examined with Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability. Both reliability coefficients show that the COVID-19 Anxiety Scale is reliable at a good level.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• COVID-19
• anxiety
• overreaction
• overprotection- hygiene

COVID-19 kaygı ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Türk halkının yeni koronavirüse yönelik kaygı düzeyini belirlemek amacıyla KOVID-19 Kaygı Ölçeği geliştirme çalışması yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın verileri 1 Mayıs-15 Haziran 2020 tarihleri arasında sosyal ağlar aracılığı ile Türkiye'nin 70 ilinden iki aşamalı olarak toplam 1075 kişiden toplanmıştır. Açımlayıcı faktör analizi için 415 kişiden, doğrulayıcı faktör analizi için 649 kişiden veri toplanmıştır. İlk örneklemden elde edilen veriler üzerinde bir dizi açımlayıcı faktör analizi yapılmıştır. Açımlayıcı faktör analizleri sonucunda 17 maddeden oluşan ölçekten 9 madde çıkarılarak “aşırı-tepki” ve “aşırı koruma-hijyen” olmak üzere iki boyuttan ve sekiz maddeden oluşan bir yapı ortaya konmuştur. KOVID-19 Kaygı Ölçeği’nin açımlayıcı faktör analizi ile ortaya konan yapısının uygunluğu ikinci örneklem verisine uygulanan doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile test edilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi bulguları KOVID-19 Kaygı Ölçeği’nin iki faktörlü yapısının model veri uyumunun mükemmel düzeyde sağlandığını göstermektedir. Bir diğer geçerlik kanıtı olarak KOVID-19 Kaygı Ölçeği’nin cinsiyet gruplarında ölçme değişmezliği incelenmiş ve metrik değişmezlik sağlanmıştır. Buna göre faktör varyansları ve yapıları cinsiyet grupları arasında karşılaştırılabilmektedir. Ölçeğin yakınsak geçerliği faktör yükleri, birleşik güvenirlik ve çıkarılan ortalama varyans değerleri aracılığı ile incelenmiştir. Tüm değerler yakınsak geçerlik için belirlenen kritik değerleri sağlamaktadır. Faktörler arası korelasyon, faktörlerin açıkladığı ortalama varyanstan düşük olduğundan ölçeğin ayırt edici geçerliği de sağlanmıştır. Ölçeğin güvenirliği cronbach alfa ve birleşik güvenirlik ile incelenmiştir. Her iki güvenirlik katsayısı da KOVID-19 kaygı Ölçeği’nin iyi düzeyde güvenilir olduğunu göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• KOVID-19
• kaygı
• aşırıtepki
• aşırıkoruma-hijyen

Kaynakça

1. Alpar, R. (2011). Çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemler. Detay Yayıncılık.
2. Bai, Y., Yao, L., Wei, T., Tian, F., Jin, D. Y., Chen, L., & Wang, M. (2020). Presumed asymptomatic carrier transmission of COVID-19. Jama, 323(14), 1406-1407. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.2565
3. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
4. Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G. J. (2020). The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The lancet, 395(10227), 912-920. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8
5. Du, J, Dong, L, Wang, T, Yuan, C, Fu, R, Zhang, L, et al., 2020. Psychological symptoms among frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan. General hospital psychiatry, 67, 144–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2020.03.011
6. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
7. Gao, J, Zheng, P, Jia, Y, Chen, H, Mao, Y, Chen, S, et al., 2020. Mental health problems and social media exposure during COVID-19 outbreak. PLoS ONE 15(4): e0231924. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231924
8. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Essex, England.

9. Hair J, Hult GTM, Ringle C, Sarstedt M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications, Incorporated
10. Hall, R. C., Hall, R. C., & Chapman, M. J. (2008). The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. General hospital psychiatry, 30(5), 446-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2008.05.003
11. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008, September). Evaluating model fit: a synthesis of the structural equation modelling literature. In 7th European Conference on research methodology for business and management studies (pp. 195-200).
12. Huang, Y, Zhao, N., 2020. Chinese mental health burden during the COVID-19 pandemic. Asian J. Psychiatr. 51, 102052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102052
13. Huang, Y, Zhao, N, 2020. Generalized anxiety disorder, depressive symptoms and sleep quality during COVID-19 outbreak in China: a web-based cross-sectional survey. Psychiatry Res. 288, 112954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112954
14. Iacobacci, C. (2017). Clinical and Experimental Psychology.
15. Joreskog, K.G. (1999). How large can a standardized coefficient be. Unplublished report. SSI Central, Inc. http://www.statmodel.com/download/Joreskog.pdf
16. Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri (Vol. 5). Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
17. Kline, T. J. (2005). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Sage Publications.
18. Lai, J, Ma, S, Wang, Y, Cai, Z, Hu, J, Wei, N, et al., 2020. Factors associated with mental health outcomes among health care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019. JAMA Netw Open 3 (3), e203976. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3976
19. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology.
20. Liu, N, Zhang, F, Wei, C, Jia, Y, Shang, Z, Sun, L, et al., 2020. Prevalence and predictors of PTSS during COVID-19 outbreak in China hardest-hit areas: Gender differences matter. Psychiatry Res 287, 112921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112921
21. Mertler, C. A., & Vannatta, R.A. (2005). Advanced and Multivariate Statistical Methods: Practical Application and Interpretation, (3rd ed.). Edition Taylor & Francis.
22. Neria, Y., & Sullivan, G. M. (2011). Understanding the mental health effects of indirect exposure to mass trauma through the media. Jama, 306(12), 1374-1375. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.1358
23. Roy, D., Tripathy, S., Kar, S. K., Sharma, N., Verma, S. K., & Kaushal, V. (2020). Study of knowledge, attitude, anxiety & perceived mental healthcare need in Indian population during COVID-19 pandemic. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102083
24. Rubin, G. J., & Wessely, S. (2020). The psychological effects of quarantining a city. BMJ 2020; 368 :m313 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m313
25. Sokolov, B. (2019). Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indices to Lack of Measurement Invariance with Categorical Indicators and Many Groups. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP, 86. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3417157
26. Stevenson, R. J., Case, T. I., Hodgson, D., Porzig-Drummond, R., Barouei, J., & Oaten, M. J. (2009). A scale for measuring hygiene behavior: development, reliability and validity. American journal of infection control, 37(7), 557-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2009.01.003
27. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidel, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Person Education Inc.
28. Torales, J., O’Higgins, M., Castaldelli-Maia, J. M., & Ventriglio, A. (2020). The outbreak of COVID-19 coronavirus and its impact on global mental health. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, Vol. 66(4) 317–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764020915212
29. Wang, C., Horby, P. W., Hayden, F. G., & Gao, G. F. (2020). A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern. The lancet, 395(10223), 470-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30185-9
30. World Health Organization, (2020). Current novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. https://www.who.int/health-topics/coronavirus
31. XINHUANET, 2020. The Latest: China confirms human-to-human transmission of 2019- nCoV, infections among medical staff. http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-01/21/c_138722888.htm
32. Zhang, J., Lu, H., Zeng, H., Zhang, S., Du, Q., Jiang, T., & Du, B. (2020). The differential psychological distress of populations affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Brain, behavior, and immunity.87:49–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.031
33. Zhu, Z., Xu, S., Wang, H., Liu, Z., Wu, J., Li, G., ... & Zhu, S. (2020). COVID-19 in Wuhan: Immediate Psychological Impact on 5062 Health Workers. MedRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.20.20025338