Development and Validation of the Brazilian Portuguese Version of the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS-BP)

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_RIBEIRO_Development_and_Validation_of_the_Brazilian_Portuguese_Version_2021.PDF (119.02 KB)
Citações na Scopus
6
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2021
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
EDUCATIONAL PUBLISHING FOUNDATION-AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
Autores
RIBEIRO, Wagner Silva
GRONHOLM, Petra C.
PAULA, Cristiane Silvestre de
HOFFMANN, Mauricio Scopel
VISTORTE, Angel Olider Rojas
ZUGMAN, Camilla
PAN, Pedro Mario
MARI, Jair de Jesus
ROHDE, Luis Augusto
Citação
STIGMA AND HEALTH, v.6, n.2, p.163-172, 2021
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
The object of the study was to translate and validate the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS) into Brazilian Portuguese. A native Brazilian speaker fluent in English translated the RIBS into Brazilian Portuguese. Comprehensibility and face validity were assessed through discussions with mental health professionals and volunteers recruited from the community. Brazilian Portuguese version of the questionnaire was back-translated into English by another Brazilian researcher fluent in English and the researcher who developed the original RIBS was consulted to check the adequacy of the questionnaire translation, and approved the final translated version. RIBS-BP was administered to 1,357 caregivers from a community-based cohort. Internal consistency and factor loading were assessed through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Differential item functioning was examined using Multiple Indicator Multiple Causes for subgroups of gender, socioeconomic status, and caregiver education. To assess external validity, we examined whether responses in RIBS-BP varied among these subgroups, considering respondents' previous contact with people with mental illness. CFA fit indices were good to excellent (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.07; 90% confidence interval, CI [0.04. 0.10]; comparative fit index [CFI] = 1.00; Tucker-Lewis Index [TLI] = 1.00). All loadings were above 0.4 (0.73 to 0.89), indicating that intended behavior items are related to the same unidimensional latent factor. In the latent model, higher socioeconomic status was associated with less intended stigma-related behavior (I) = 0.20, p < .001), adjusted for education and gender. RIBS-BP has good internal consistency, demonstrate measurement invariance among subgroups, and appears to be a valid measure of stigma, representing a suitable tool to assess reported and intended stigma-related behaviors in Brazil.
Palavras-chave
social stigma, mental disorders, discrimination, psychometrics, health behavior
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/40825
Referências
  1. Brasileira de Empresas de Pesquisa, 2010, CRIT BRAS CLASS EC 2
  2. Brown T.A., 2015, CONFIRMATORY FACTOR, V2nd
  3. Clement S, 2015, PSYCHOL MED, V45, P11, DOI 10.1017/S0033291714000129
  4. Clement S, 2011, J MENT HEALTH, V20, P219, DOI 10.3109/09638237.2011.579645
  5. Coates D, 2019, COMMUNITY MENT HLT J, V55, P476, DOI 10.1007/s10597-018-0270-8
  6. CRONBACH LJ, 1951, PSYCHOMETRIKA, V16, P297
  7. Evans-Lacko S, 2011, EPIDEMIOL PSYCH SCI, V20, P263, DOI 10.1017/S2045796011000308
  8. Evans-Lacko S, 2013, BRIT J PSYCHIAT, V202, pS77, DOI 10.1192/bjp.bp.113.126672
  9. Gissler M, 2013, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V13, DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-834
  10. Gronholm PC, 2017, SOC PSYCH PSYCH EPID, V52, P249, DOI 10.1007/s00127-017-1341-9
  11. Hu LT, 1999, STRUCT EQU MODELING, V6, P1, DOI 10.1080/10705519909540118
  12. Koike S, 2018, EPIDEMIOL PSYCH SCI, V27, P199, DOI 10.1017/S2045796016001050
  13. Laursen TM, 2007, J CLIN PSYCHIAT, V68, P899, DOI 10.4088/JCP.v68n0612
  14. Lee S, 2009, BRIT J PSYCHIAT, V194, P411, DOI 10.1192/bjp.bp.108.054841
  15. Link BG, 2006, LANCET, V367, P528, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68184-1
  16. Loch AA, 2014, INT J SOC PSYCHIATR, V60, P595, DOI 10.1177/0020764013507248
  17. Loch AA, 2011, REV PSIQ CLIN-BRAZIL, V38, P173, DOI 10.1590/S0101-60832011000500001
  18. Mascayano F, 2016, REV BRAS PSIQUIATR, V38, P73, DOI 10.1590/1516-4446-2015-1652
  19. Mukherjee S, 2018, INDIAN J PUBLIC HLTH, V62, P15, DOI 10.4103/ijph.IJPH_88_17
  20. Muthen L. K., 2012, COMPREHENSIVE MODELL
  21. Pingani L, 2016, EPIDEMIOL PSYCH SCI, V25, P485, DOI 10.1017/S2045796015000633
  22. Peluso ETP, 2011, REV BRAS PSIQUIATR, V33, P130, DOI [10.1590/S1516-44462010005000004, 10.1590/S1516-44462011000200007]
  23. Reavley NJ, 2018, SOC PSYCH PSYCH EPID, V53, P289, DOI 10.1007/s00127-017-1454-1
  24. Ronzani TM, 2009, SOC SCI MED, V69, P1080, DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.07.026
  25. Rusch N, 2012, AUST NZ J PSYCHIAT, V46, P641, DOI 10.1177/0004867412438873
  26. Salum GA, 2015, INT J METH PSYCH RES, V24, P58, DOI 10.1002/mpr.1459
  27. Semrau M, 2015, EPIDEMIOL PSYCH SCI, V24, P382, DOI 10.1017/S2045796015000359
  28. Stuart H, 2016, GLOB MENT HEALTH, V3, DOI 10.1017/gmh.2016.11
  29. Suhrcke M., 2011, IMPACT HLTH HLTH BEH
  30. Thornicroft G., 2014, STIGMA DISCIMINATION
  31. Thornicroft G., 2006, SHUNNED DISCRIMINATI
  32. THORNICROFT G, 2013, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V346, DOI 10.1136/BMJ.F2969
  33. Thornicroft G, 2016, LANCET, V387, P1123, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00298-6
  34. Thornicroft G, 2009, LANCET, V373, P408, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61817-6
  35. von dem Knesebeck O, 2013, SOC PSYCH PSYCH EPID, V48, P775, DOI 10.1007/s00127-012-0599-1
  36. World Health Organization, 2016, PROC TRANSL AD INSTR
  37. Yamaguchi S, 2014, PSYCHIAT CLIN NEUROS, V68, P448, DOI 10.1111/pcn.12151

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MPS
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/23