The new Confirmatory Factor Analysis of one’s Personal Relationship Level (ECP) showed that the first design proposed of the article authors did not provides an adequate easily fit into the present day sample ([chi-square] / df = 5.63, GFI = .93, CFI = .86, TLI = .84, RMSEA = .07), specifically in terms of the [chi-square] / df, CFI age TLI values. Inside the light of these results and you may because of the parameters put (Browne Cudeck, 1992; Hu Bentler, 1999; Segars Grover, 1993) we decided to proceed that have a keen Exploratory Grounds Analysis.
The significance of the effect of the relationship status on the level of personal commitment of the participants was evaluated by the ANOVA one way method, in which the normality (p <
The latest Exploratory Foundation Research of the Individual Relationship Scale (ECP), as Dominant Axis Factoring, revealed the unidimensional framework of one’s scale, because xmeets only the accessibility to among parts attained the brand new lowest Eigenvalue of just one. This was also clear in the translation of your scree-area graph (Job, 2009).
The precision of aspect is actually assessed from the internal texture of one’s measure, in the form of Cronbach’s alpha, additionally the adequacy of each items has also been confirmed (Table 1). It had been affirmed that facts 3 and you may 10 failed to fulfill the minimum standards for addition, to the loading to own item 10 below the worth sensed appropriate, both got weakened goods-overall correlations and removal of both points enhanced the property value Cronbach’s alpha, towards the worth just before removing getting .80. When you look at the white associated with research, the option was created to remove these two affairs about study (; Nunnally Bernstein, 1994). These materials coincide exactly into a couple of activities the newest article writers believe as being relative to the newest meta-commitment dimensions, for this reason becoming theoretically sufficient the empirical distinction about rest of what exactly and their difference on the level. The last unidimensional design, without having any known situations, teaches you % of one’s overall difference, with acceptable item-complete correlations (Field, 2009) ranging from .thirty six and you may .sixty with a whole mediocre get of 5.56 (DP = .86). The brand new Cronbach alphas are different ranging from .82 towards overall shot, .83 and you may .81 respectively on men and women try. For the four subgroups, i acquired .82, .80, .70 and you may .84 correspondingly having professionals in the a matchmaking relationship, relationship having cohabitation, certified relationship and you can maried people. We are able to for this reason consider all inner texture indicator while the a beneficial (Cronbach, 1970; ).
The average ECP scores in the current sample are as follows, 5.56 (DP = .86) for the total sample, 5.48 (DP = .86) for women and 5.70 (DP = .83) for men. This difference is significant F(1, 922) = ; p < .001; [[eta].sup.2]p = .02.
Continuing with the validation of the Personal Commitment Scale (ECP), we proceeded with the concurrent validity criteria analysis. The global values for personal commitment showed, as expected, significant positive correlations (p < .001) with the total RRF-R (.63) and with all its subscales (Passion, .64; Confidence, .51; Conflicts, .44; Intimacy, .45), which indicate that higher levels of personal commitment correlated with higher indices of relationship quality, in all its dimensions.
A mathematically extreme effectation of the relationship reputation to your private commitment degrees of the participants F(3, nine20) = nine
Once the described analyses were completed, they were followed by the exploration of the various relationship statuses present in the sample of participants (Table 3) with the results obtained by these in the Portuguese version of the scale thus validated, the ECP. 05 for three of the four types of relationship statuses) and homoscedasticity analyses W(3, 920) = 1.06; p = .298 were sufficiently robust to proceed with the analyses. 59; p < .001; [[eta].sup.2]p = .03 was observed.
Нет Ответов