↓ Skip to main content

Do the Constructs of the FACES IV Change Based on Definitions of “Family?” A Measurement Invariance Test

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Do the Constructs of the FACES IV Change Based on Definitions of “Family?” A Measurement Invariance Test
Published in
Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, July 2017
DOI 10.1111/jmft.12257
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scale (FACES) IV does not provide instructions about which family members respondents should think about while answering questions. This study examined which family members respondents thought about while completing the FACES IV, and if this changed measurement invariance and population heterogeneity of the measure. Using a sample of n = 511 individuals, a latent class analysis showed three distinct classes: Nuclear Family, Family of Origin, and All of the Above. The FACES IV demonstrated measurement invariance across classes on the majority of subscales; however, population heterogeneity tests suggested that the means and variances of the subscales varied across classes. The findings suggest further examination of how the measure functions with unique family constellations is warranted.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 13%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 3 19%
Unknown 3 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 38%
Social Sciences 3 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 August 2017.
All research outputs
#9,600,222
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Marital & Family Therapy
#284
of 855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,287
of 357,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Marital & Family Therapy
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 855 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
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 357,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.