$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$

연합인증

연합인증 가입 기관의 연구자들은 소속기관의 인증정보(ID와 암호)를 이용해 다른 대학, 연구기관, 서비스 공급자의 다양한 온라인 자원과 연구 데이터를 이용할 수 있습니다.

이는 여행자가 자국에서 발행 받은 여권으로 세계 각국을 자유롭게 여행할 수 있는 것과 같습니다.

연합인증으로 이용이 가능한 서비스는 NTIS, DataON, Edison, Kafe, Webinar 등이 있습니다.

한번의 인증절차만으로 연합인증 가입 서비스에 추가 로그인 없이 이용이 가능합니다.

다만, 연합인증을 위해서는 최초 1회만 인증 절차가 필요합니다. (회원이 아닐 경우 회원 가입이 필요합니다.)

연합인증 절차는 다음과 같습니다.

최초이용시에는
ScienceON에 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 로그인 (본인 확인 또는 회원가입) → 서비스 이용

그 이후에는
ScienceON 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 서비스 이용

연합인증을 활용하시면 KISTI가 제공하는 다양한 서비스를 편리하게 이용하실 수 있습니다.

한국어판 부부 만족도 측정도구 및 단축형의 타당도와 신뢰도
Validity and Reliability of the Korean Version of the Couple Satisfaction Index 원문보기

Journal of Korean academy of nursing = 대한간호학회지, v.52 no.2, 2022년, pp.228 - 243  

김석선 (이화여자대학교 간호대학) ,  길민지 (이화여자대학교 간호대학) ,  김다은 (이화여자대학교 간호대학) ,  김선해 (이화여자대학교 간호대학) ,  허다연 (이화여자대학교 간호대학) ,  문난영 (이화여자대학교 간호대학)

Abstract AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

Purpose: The study aimed to translate the Couple Satisfaction Index (CSI 32) into Korean, to evaluate the reliability and validity of CSI 32 and short-form (CSI 16, 4) in the Korean context, and to determine a cut-off score for Korean couples. Methods: Korean Versions of the Couple Satisfaction Inde...

주제어

참고문헌 (49)

  1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). OECD Family Database [Internet]. Paris: OECD; 2019 [cited 2021 Aug 4]. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/els/family/SF_3_1_Marriage_and_divorce_rates.pdf. 

  2. Sbarra DA, Coan JA. Divorce and health: Good data in need of better theory. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2017;13:91-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.05.014 

  3. Kim JH. The effect of married couple communication on the satisfaction of marriage: Focusing on the mediating effect of marital intimacy. Korean Family Resource Management Association. 2019;23(4):57-73. https://doi.org/10.22626/jkfrma.2019.23.4.004 

  4. Urbano-Contreras A, Iglesias-Garcia MT, Martinez-Gonzalez RA. Development and validation of the Satisfaction in Couple Relationship Scale (SCR). Contemporary Family Therapy. 2017;39(1):54-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-016-9400-z 

  5. Whisman MA, Gilmour AL, Salinger JM. Marital satisfaction and mortality in the United States adult population. Health Psychology. 2018;37(11):1041-1044. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000677 

  6. Ward PJ, Lundberg NR, Zabriskie RB, Berrett K. Measuring marital satisfaction: A Comparison of the revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale and the satisfaction with married life scale. Marriage & Family Review. 2009;45(4):412-429. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494920902828219 

  7. Funk JL, Rogge RD. Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction Index. Journal of Family Psychology. 2007;21(4):572-583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.572 

  8. Chung H. A theoretical review for developing a Korean Type Marital Satisfaction Scale. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association. 2001;39(11):89-106. 

  9. Lee KS, Hahn DW. Development of the Marital Adjustment Inventory(MAI). The Korean Journal of Health Psychology. 2003;8(3):679-705. 

  10. Kim JS, Kwon SM. Development of Marital Beliefs Scale. The Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2009;28(2):459-473. https://doi.org/10.15842/kjcp.2009.28.2.008 

  11. Kim JS. Development of the Marital Distress Perceptions Scale. The Korean Journal of Woman Psychology. 2011;16(2):179-196. https://doi.org/10.18205/kpa.2011.16.2.003 

  12. Jang JH. Development and validity of Marital Affection Behavior Scale(MABS). The Korean Journal of Woman Psychology. 2011;16(4):531-553. https://doi.org/10.18205/kpa.2011.16.4.007 

  13. Spanier GB. Measuring Dyadic Adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family. 1976;38(1):15-28. https://doi.org/10.2307/350547 

  14. Lee MS, Kim ZS. A preliminary study on the standardization of the Korean Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1996;15(1):129-140. 

  15. Schumm WR, Paff-Bergen LA, Hatch RC, Obiorah FC, Copeland JM, Meens LD, et al. Concurrent and discriminant validity of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale. Journal of Marriage and Family. 1986;48(2):381-387. https://doi.org/10.2307/352405 

  16. Korea Institute of Child Care and Education. Panel Study on Korean Children (PSKC). [Internet]. Seoul: PSKC; 2018 [cited 2022 Apr 20]. Available from: https://panel.kicce.re.kr/pskc/board/index.do?menu_idx42&manage_idx161. 

  17. Locke HJ, Wallace KM. Short marital-adjustment and prediction tests: Their reliability and validity. Marriage and Family Living. 1959;21(3):251-255. https://doi.org/10.2307/348022 

  18. Norton R. Measuring marital quality: A critical look at the dependent variable. Journal of Marriage and Family. 1983;45(1):141-151. https://doi.org/10.2307/351302 

  19. Hendrick SS. A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and Family. 1988;50(1):93-98. https://doi.org/10.2307/352430 

  20. Huston TL, Vangelisti AL. Socioemotional behavior and satisfaction in marital relationships: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1991;61(5):721-733. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.61.5.721 

  21. Graham JM, Diebels KJ, Barnow ZB. The reliability of relationship satisfaction: A reliability generalization meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology. 2011;25(1):39-48. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022441 

  22. DeVellis RF. Scale development: Theory and applications. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2016. p. 205-232. 

  23. Chonody JM, Gabb J, Killian M, Dunk-West P. Measuring relationship quality in an international study: Exploratory and confirmatory factor validity. Research on Social Work Practice. 2018;28(8):920-930. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731516631120 

  24. Okhotnikov IA, Wood ND. Adaptation of the Couples Satisfaction Index into Russian. Contemporary Family Therapy. 2020;42(2):140-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-019-09517-6 

  25. Forouzesh Yekta F, Yaghubi H, Mootabi F, Roshan R, Gholami Fesharaki M, Omidi A. Psychometric characteristics and factor analysis of the Persian version of Couples Satisfaction Index. Avicenna Journal of Neuropsychophysiology. 2017;4(2):49-56. https://doi.org/10.32598/ajnpp.4.2.49 

  26. Hughes JA, Gordon KC, Lenger KA, Roberson PNE, Cordova JV. Examining the role of therapeutic alliance and split alliance on couples' relationship satisfaction following a brief couple intervention. Contemporary Family Therapy. 2021;43(4):359-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-021-09609-2 

  27. Cha G, Kim SS, Gil M. The effects of stress and marital satisfaction on depression in middle-aged couples: Analysis using an actor-partner interdependence model. Health and Social Welfare Review. 2017;37(2):126-149. https://doi.org/10.15709/hswr.2017.37.2.126 

  28. Galovan AM, Holmes EK, Proulx CM. Theoretical and methodological issues in relationship research: Considering the common fate model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2017;34(1):44-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407515621179 

  29. Joo S, Jun HJ, Chai HY. A longitudinal interaction between Korean elderly couples on marital satisfaction. Family and Culture. 2013;25(4):91-119. https://doi.org/10.21478/family.25.4.201312.004 

  30. Jbilou J, Charbonneau A, Sonier RP, Greenman PS, Levesque N, Barriault S, et al. Canadian French translation of the Couples Satisfaction Index: A pre-validation pilot study exploring men's perspective. Research Square. [Preprint]. 2021 [cited 2021 Aug 5]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-799178/v1. 

  31. World Health Organization (WHO). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments [Internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2021 [cited 2021 Jun 15]. Available from: https://www.coursehero.com/file/30372721/WHO-Process-of-translation-and-adaptation-of-instrumentspdf/. 

  32. Chung YK. Solution focused therapy for care conflict of newlywed dual earner couple. Korean Journal of Solution-Focused Therapy. 2016;3(1):55-81. 

  33. Boateng GO, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Melgar-Quinonez HR, Young SL. Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health. 2018;6:149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149 

  34. Kim DS. A study on the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale. Journal of Korean Home Management Association. 1989;7(2):85-94. 

  35. Cano-Prous A, Martin-Lanas R, Moya-Querejeta J, Beunza-Nuin MI, Lahortiga-Ramos F, Garcia-Granero M. Psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2014;14(2):137-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70047-X 

  36. Kim SS, Gil M, Kim-Godwin Y. Development and validation of the Family Relationship Assessment Scale in Korean college students' families. Family Process. 2021;60(2):586-601. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12559 

  37. Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement. 1977;1(3):385-401. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662167700100306 

  38. Cho MJ, Kim KH. Diagnostic validity of the CES-D(Korean version) in the assessment of DSM-III-R major depression. Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatric Association. 1993;32(3):381-399. 

  39. Mustanski B, Starks T, Newcomb ME. Methods for the design and analysis of relationship and partner effects on sexual health. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 2014;43(1):21-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0215-9 

  40. Peterson GW, Bush KR. Handbook of marriage and the family. 3rd ed. New York (NY): Science & Business Media; 2013. p. 278-306. 

  41. Kim SS, Gil M. A multilevel analysis of the effect of individual and family personalities on depressive symptoms in families with college students. Health and Social Welfare Review. 2016;36(3):34-52. https://doi.org/10.15709/hswr.2016.36.3.34 

  42. Kim SY. Fundamentals and extensions of structural equation modeling. Seoul: Hakjisa; 2016. p. 41-302. 

  43. Hair JF, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. 2011;19(2):139-152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202 

  44. Carlson KD, Herdman AO. Understanding the impact of convergent validity on research results. Organizational Research Methods. 2012;15(1):17-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428110392383 

  45. Rhee K. Wrong applications with overall model evaluations and its corrections in structural equation modeling. Survey Research. 2016;17(1):71-83. https://doi.org/10.20997/SR.17.1.4 

  46. Lamela D, Figueiredo B, Morais A, Matos P, Jongenelen I. Are measures of marital satisfaction valid for women with depressive symptoms? The examination of factor structure and measurement invariance of the Couple Satisfaction Index-4 across depression levels in Portuguese women. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy. 2020;27(2):214-219. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2420 

  47. Doss BD, Roddy MK, Nowlan KM, Rothman K, Christensen A. Maintenance of gains in relationship and individual functioning following the online OurRelationship program. Behavior Therapy. 2019;50(1):73-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2018.03.011 

  48. Xue WL, He HG, Chua YJ, Wang W, Shorey S. Factors influencing first-time fathers' involvement in their wives' pregnancy and childbirth: A correlational study. Midwifery. 2018;62:20-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2018.03.002 

  49. Jimenez-Picon N, Romero-Martin M, Ramirez-Baena L, Palomo-Lara JC, Gomez-Salgado J. Systematic review of the relationship between couple dyadic adjustment and family health. Children. 2021;8(6):491. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8060491 

저자의 다른 논문 :

관련 콘텐츠

오픈액세스(OA) 유형

GOLD

오픈액세스 학술지에 출판된 논문

저작권 관리 안내
섹션별 컨텐츠 바로가기

AI-Helper ※ AI-Helper는 오픈소스 모델을 사용합니다.

AI-Helper 아이콘
AI-Helper
안녕하세요, AI-Helper입니다. 좌측 "선택된 텍스트"에서 텍스트를 선택하여 요약, 번역, 용어설명을 실행하세요.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.

선택된 텍스트

맨위로