| Title |
The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Metacognitions about Health Questionnaire in college students
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-017-1780-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisha Dai, Robin Bailey, Yunlong Deng |
| Abstract |
In order to explain the potential mechanism that might motivate and maintain health anxiety (HA), researchers have developed several measures to assess the level of HA and to identify related cognitions and personality features. However, such instruments typically measure general metacognitions [e.g., the Metacognition Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30)], thereby compromising the degree of sensitivity and specificity of measurement as applied to HA-related metacognitions. To address that issue, the Metacognitions about Health Questionnaire (MCQ-HA) was designed especially for measuring metacognitive beliefs specific to HA. Because a Chinese version of MCQ-HA may be helpful in improving our understanding of HA in a Chinese population, in the current study we sought to develop a Chinese version of the MCQ-HA (CMCQ-HA). We translated the MCQ-HA into Chinese with consideration of cultural diversity. For evaluation of its validity and stability, a sample of 1290 Chinese college students answered the CMCQ-HA, the Short Health Anxiety Inventory, the MCQ-30, and the Neuroticism scale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. 292 students of them answered the CMCQ-HA twice. Good internal consistency (α = 0.81) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.70) of the CMCQ-HA was presented. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated a three-factor structure: beliefs about biased thinking, beliefs that thoughts can cause illness, and beliefs that thoughts are uncontrollable. Convergent validity, divergent validity, and incremental validity all were acceptable. Measurement invariance across gender was established. The CMCQ-HA shows promise for the measurement of specific HA-related metacognitions in Chinese populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 36% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,835,293
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#1,656
of 2,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,008
of 442,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#43
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,915 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.