$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$
  • 검색어에 아래의 연산자를 사용하시면 더 정확한 검색결과를 얻을 수 있습니다.
  • 검색연산자
검색연산자 기능 검색시 예
() 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine))
공백 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (나노 기계)
예2) 나노 장영실
| 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역)
예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실
! NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 예1) (황금 !백금)
예2) !image
* 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 예) semi*
"" 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 예) "Transform and Quantization"
쳇봇 이모티콘
안녕하세요!
ScienceON 챗봇입니다.
궁금한 것은 저에게 물어봐주세요.

논문 상세정보

간호학생을 대상으로한 건강관련 강인성 도구(HRHS)의 신뢰도와 타당도 검증 및 수정

The Reliability and Validity of the Health-Related Hardiness Scale in a Sample of Korean Nursing Students

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to test the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Health-Related Hardiness Scale(HRHS) in a sample of Korean nursing students. The korean version of HRHS was administered to 234 nursing students including 135 college students and 99 university students. The Korean version of HRHS was measured on a 6 Likert scale, assessing three factors of HRHS : control, commitment, and challenge. Internal consistency was used to test the instrument's reliability. The internal consistency of the scale was measured using a coefficient alpha. The coefficient alpha was .69(control), .49(commitment). and .69(challenge), Item analysis and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to test the instrument's construct validity. The item analysis identified that there were 13 items. which were lower than the .25 item-total correlation. CFA revealed that the scale's fadoral validity was not proper by showing unfit indices(RMSEA .07. stand, RMR .09. GFI .71). According to the findings of this study, the reliability and construct validity of the Korean version of HRHS is not satisfactory in the sample of nursing students. As a result. the researcher modified the scale through item analysis and repetitive CFA process, and proposed the revised 25-item Korean version of HRHS for nursing students. The revised scale's reliability(control .74, commitment .73. challenge .77) and factorial validity were within acceptable levels. The item analysis identified that there was no item, which is lower than the .25 item-total correlation. CFA revealed that the scale's factoral validity was proper by showing fit indices(RMSEA .08 stand. RMR .08. GFI .80).

참고문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문의 참고문헌 없음

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음

원문보기

원문 PDF 다운로드

  • ScienceON :

원문 URL 링크

원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다. (원문복사서비스 안내 바로 가기)

상세조회 0건 원문조회 0건

DOI 인용 스타일