↓ Skip to main content

Measurement of alienation among adolescents: construct validity of three scales on powerlessness, meaninglessness and social isolation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

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.
Title
Measurement of alienation among adolescents: construct validity of three scales on powerlessness, meaninglessness and social isolation
Published in
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s41687-018-0040-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Signe Boe Rayce, Svend Kreiner, Mogens Trab Damsgaard, Tine Nielsen, Bjørn Evald Holstein

Abstract

Psychological alienation is an important concept in the study of adolescents' health and behavior but no gold standard for measuring alienation among adolescents exists. There is a need for new scales with high validity for use in adolescent health and social research. The purpose of the present study was to develop and validate alienation scales in accordance with Seeman's conceptualization of alienation focusing on three independent variants specifically relevant in adolescent health research: powerlessness, meaninglessness and social isolation. Cross-sectional data from 3083 adolescents aged 13 to 15 years from the Danish contribution to the cross-national study Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) were used. We identified and developed items, addressed content and face validity through interviews, and examined the criterion-related construct validity of the scales using graphical loglinear Rasch models (GLLRM). The three scales each comprised three to five face valid items. The powerlessness scale reflected the adolescent's expectancy as to whether his/her behavior can determine the outcome or reinforcement he/she seeks. The meaninglessness scale reflected the expectancy as to whether satisfactory predictions regarding the effects of one's behavior are possible. Finally, the social isolation scale reflected whether the adolescent had a low expectancy for inclusion and social acceptance. All scales contained some uniform local dependency and differential item functioning. However, only to a limited degree, which could be accounted for using GLLRM. Thus the scales fitted GLLRMs and can therefore be considered to be essentially construct valid and essentially objective. The three alienation scales appear to be content and face valid and fulfill the psychometric properties of a good construct valid reflective scale. This suggests that the scales may be appropriate in future large-scale surveys to examine the relation between alienation and a range of adolescent health outcomes such as health, behavior and wellbeing.

Mendeley readers

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.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 25%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 19%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 6 38%
Unspecified 4 25%
Psychology 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 September 2018.
All research outputs
#10,780,032
of 13,543,688 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
#79
of 110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,923
of 270,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,543,688 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 110 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 270,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them