Preliminary Psychometrics of a New Scale:
A Sense of Acceptance in Community Activities
Phyllis Solomon, PhD
Professor
University of Pennsylvania School of Social Policy and Practice. Affiliated with UPENN Collaborative.
Sungkyu Lee, MSW
Doctoral Student
University of Pennsylvania School of Social Policy and Practice.
Arpita Chatterjee, MSW
Doctoral Student
Rutgers University School of Social Work.
LaKeetra McClaine, BA, BSN, RN
Research Specialist
UPENN Collaborative, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine
Citation:
Solomon P, Lee S, Chatterjee A & McClaine L.(2010). Preliminary Psychometrics of a New Scale: A Sense of
Acceptance in Community Activities. International
Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation. Vol
14(2) 113-122
Correspondence: Sungkyu Lee, MSW, School of Social
Policy and Practice, University of Pennsylvania, 3815 Walnut Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6214
Financial Disclosure: This study was funded by National Institute of Disability Rehabilitation & Research.
Abstract
Background:
A sense of acceptance when participating in community activities is
considered as the first step toward achieving a sense of belonging for
people with severe psychiatric disorders, which is a major component of
psychological integration.
Aims: The present study was designed to
develop a measure of a Sense of Acceptance in Community Activities
(SACA) for persons with severe psychiatric disorders.
Method:
Fifty-five study participants were recruited from two Assertive
Community Treatment (ACT) teams. To examine internal consistency and
content validity of SACA, an item analysis, exploratory factor
analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and correlations with
hypothesized concepts were employed.
Results: The SACA has strong psychometric properties, including good reliability, content validity, and construct validity.
Conclusions:
Given the brevity and ease of administration of the SACA, it is a
useful evaluation tool to assess outcomes for interventions designed to
increase community integration of persons with severe psychiatric
disorders.
Key Words: psychometrics, community integration, psychiatric disability, severe mental illness
IntroductionCommunity
integration of adults with severe psychiatric disorders is a major
policy goal in the United States as affirmed most recently by the
landmark Olmstead Supreme Court decision in 1999. Yet, all too
frequently, this population is physically in the community, but they do
not have a psychological or social sense of belonging to the community
(Dewees, Pulice, & McCormick, 1996; Granerud & Severinsson,
2006; Prince & Prince, 2002). Although loneliness and social
isolation are highly prevalent among those with severe psychiatric
disorders, they are frequently reluctant to participate in community
resources and activities due to fear of rejection (Elisha, Castle,
& Hocking, 2006; Perese & Wolf, 2005). Consequently, an
essential goal of community mental health programs, particularly
psychiatric rehabilitation programs, is to assist in facilitating
greater community participation of their clients (Prince & Prince,
2002). As a part of such efforts in the current atmosphere of evidence
based practice, there is a need to be able to measure these programs’
effectiveness in achieving community integration of their clients.
However, most of the measures of community integration have focused on
physical integration, (i.e., participating in community activities and
use of community resources), neglecting social (i.e., social
interactions and social networks); and psychological aspect of
integration (i.e., a sense of belonging and acceptance) (Wong &
Solomon, 2002). The present study addressed this gap by developing a
measure of a sense of acceptance in community activities for persons
with severe psychiatric disorders. In this article, we report on the
psychometric properties of the measure Sense of Acceptance in Community
Activities, specifically designed for the population served by
community-based mental health programs.
BackgroundPsychological
integration has to do with the perceptual aspects of feeling a part of
the community or feeling as though one belongs to a group and is a
valued and accepted member of the group. Therefore, it is not
surprising that some have equated a sense of belonging with the concept
of social integration (Hagerty & Patusky, 1995). However, there has
been limited development of measures in the realm of psychological and
social integration per se. Recently, there is an emerging mental health
literature on a sense of belonging, which is an important component of
psychological integration. The research in this area has focused on the
general population, not specifically on persons with severe psychiatric
disorders.
According to Baumeister and Leary (1995), belonging has
been identified as a basic human motivation and an integral component
of positive mental health. Hagerty and her colleagues (1992) have
defined a sense of belonging as “the experience of personal involvement
in a system or environment so that persons feel themselves to be an
integral part of that system or environment” (p. 173). This concept has
two delineated characteristics: “[1] the experience of being valued,
needed, or important with respect to other people, groups, or
environments, and [2] the experience of fitting in or being congruent
with other people, groups, or environments through shared or
complementary characteristics” (Hagerty, Williams, Coyne, & Early,
1996, p. 236). Hagerty and her colleagues (1996) note that in the
absence of a sense of belonging individuals feel lonely and depressed.
Their subsequent research concluded that those with a greater sense of
belonging have a greater degree of social and psychological
functioning. Deficits in a sense of belonging have been determined to
be associated with increased feelings of loneliness (Hagerty et al.,
1996), higher levels of depression (Cuijpers & Van Lameren, 1999),
and diminished psychological well-being (Coyne & Downey,
1991).
While the goal of community integration or
social inclusion is to have persons with a psychiatric disorder feel a
sense of belonging in their communities of choice, the first step
toward achieving this goal is for them to feel comfortable and accepted
when participating in community groups and social activities. Without
this level of comfort and an absence of anxiety, it is unlikely that
persons with severe psychiatric disorders will utilize or participate
in the resources available to them as members of their communities.
Consequently, we focused our efforts on developing a measure on a
concept that we saw as a precursor to achieving this more ambitious
goal, a sense of acceptance when participating in community activities.
We defined a sense of acceptance as feeling socially and
psychologically comfortable and welcomed when attending events and
activities in the community. Given the high degree of stigma and
discrimination that those with psychiatric disorder frequently
experience, their fears of rejection and feeling of shame may inhibit
them from taking advantage of opportunities available to them,
including using a variety of community resources. Therefore, they may
well avoid utilizing such resources even though they have the potential
to reduce their social isolation and feelings of loneliness and
increasing their sense of social inclusion. Ultimately, it is expected
that such participation by persons with severe psychiatric disorders
will likely lead to increasing the size of their social networks and
the degree of their social support. We therefore hypothesized that
measures of loneliness, stigma, and social inclusion would likely be
related to the construct of social acceptance; and if so, would offer
evidence of the construct validity of our measure.
MethodParticipantsStudy
participants were recruited from two Assertive Community Treatment
(ACT) teams. The Sense of Acceptance in Community Activities (SACA)
scale was part of a comprehensive interview schedule that was
administered prior to clients entering an intervention study designed
to increase their participation in community resources and activities,
where clients from one team, which was randomly selected, would receive
the intervention and clients from the other team would not. Team staff
asked clients about their interest in participating in the study. If
clients were interested, they were referred to research assistants who
screened for study eligibility: their interest in increasing or
maintaining their involvement in community activities and whether they
had a severe psychiatric diagnosis (i.e., schizophrenia spectrum
disorder or major affective disorder). If eligible and interested,
their consent for the study was obtained. This study was reviewed and
approved by the Institutional Review Board of University of
Pennsylvania.
A total of 137 clients were approached for the
study. Of the 137 clients, about 21% of clients (n = 29) refused to be
screened and 17% of clients (n = 23) were ineligible for the study.
After the screening and determined to be eligible, six clients (4%)
refused to participate in the study and fifteen clients (11%) did not
show for the interview. Finally, sixty-four clients (47%) were
interviewed by trained interviewers. Among them, eight clients were
terminated by either interviewers or participants themselves. One
client who did not answer the items on the SACA measure was excluded
from the present analysis.
The final sample of 55 clients
consisted of 50.9 % male (n = 28) and 49.1 % female (n = 27), ages
23-71 with an average age of 43.33 years (SD = 11.64). The majority of
the sample was white (50.9%), followed by black (43.6%), and had a
diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizophrenia spectrum disorder (70.9 %)
with 25.5% having a bipolar or major depressive disorder.
MeasurementsA Sense of Acceptance in Community Activities (SACA)
A
Sense of Acceptance in Community Activities (SACA) was originally an
8-item, self-report scale. The participants were asked if they feel a
part of the community and feel comfortable when participating with
strangers in community activities and groups. The items were generated
by the first author based on a review of the literature, as well as
clinical and research experiences. The items were then reviewed by
three experts who had extensive research and/or practice experience
with the population. Based on their input, the items were refined. The
questions were measured on a four-point Likert scale, ranging from 1
(never) to 4 (often). Item 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 were reverse-recoded so
higher scores indicate higher levels of SACA (see Table 1 for listing
of items).
In order to test the construct validity of the measure, the following scales were correlated with the SACA.
Social inclusionSocial
inclusion scale assessed the extent to which the respondent had social
contact with others. This instrument was a scale in Lehman’s Quality of
Life Interview (Lehman, 1988) which was developed for this population
and has good reported psychometrics. The social inclusion measure is a
6-item scale asking about the extent to which the person had contact
with others using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all)
to 5 (at least once a day), with a higher score indicating a greater
degree of social inclusion. The internal consistency of the social
inclusion scale was .68 in the present study.
LonelinessLoneliness
was measured by the UCLA Loneliness scale which was developed to assess
subjective feelings of loneliness or social isolation (Russel, Peplau,
& Cutrona, 1980). This 20-item measure has reported high internal
consistency and good evidence of construct, concurrent, and
discriminant validity (Hagerty et al., 1996; Russel et al., 1980).
Items were assessed on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never)
to 4 (always), with a higher score indicating a greater degree of
loneliness. The internal consistency of the Loneliness scale was .86 in
the current study.
StigmaThe Consumer
Experience of Stigma Questionnaire (CESQ) was used to measure stigma
and seems to have demonstrated validity (Dickerson, Sommerville,
Origoni, Ringel, & Parente, 2002). This scale was comprised of two
subscales, a 9-item stigma scale and a 12-item discrimination scale.
Items were scored from 1 (Never) to 5 (Very Often), with a higher score
indicating a higher level of stigma. The internal consistency of the
stigma scale was .72. The discrimination scale had a low reliability
(.45) in the present study and was therefore not included in further
analysis.
Data analysesData analyses were
designed to examine internal consistency, content validity, and
construct validity of SACA. First, in order to examine the extent to
which the items were internally consistent with the SACA scale, an item
analysis was conducted. Second, to examine content validity,
exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) were employed. As for EFA, principal component estimation was
used for extracting factors and varimax with Kaiser Normalization
technique was conducted as a rotation method. To verify the SACA factor
structure, CFA was conducted using LISREL 8.80. Because the variables
of SACA were measured using an ordinal scale, robust weighted least
squares method was used, which is also more suitable for small sample
sizes (Flora & Curran, 2004).
Guided by Hu and
Bentler (1999), the following model fit statistics were employed: Chi Square, root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA; <.06, acceptable), non-normed
fit index (NNFI; >.95, acceptable), and comparative fit index (CFI; >.95, acceptable). In
order to examine the construct validity of the scale, correlation coefficients
with measures theoretically expected to be related to SACA (i.e., social
inclusion, loneliness, and stigma) were examined.
ResultsItem CharacteristicsDescriptive
statistics of SACA are presented in Table 1. Means of each of the items
ranged from 2.13 to 3.07. The mean of the total scale items was 21 with
standard deviation of 4.73. For all items, the skewness was between –1
to +1, which indicated a normal distribution of the scores. Even though
some of kurtosis values were slightly greater than –1, the value
demonstrated a close to normal distribution for all items.
Table
1. Item characteristics (N=55)
|
Item Number
|
Item
|
Mean (SD)
|
Min-Max
|
Skewness
|
Kurtosis
|
|
1
|
I don’t have many friends to do activities with.
|
2.40 (0.91)
|
1-4
|
.46
|
-.57
|
|
2
|
I don’t feel comfortable attending functions when I don’t know
anyone.
|
2.13 (1.09)
|
1-4
|
.54
|
-1.0
|
|
3
|
I am very anxious going to new places alone.
|
2.22 (1.11)
|
1-4
|
.50
|
-1.04
|
|
4
|
When attending activities in the community,
I feel accepted.
|
2.93 (0.96)
|
1-4
|
-.50
|
-.69
|
|
5
|
When attending activities in the community,
I feel like I belong.
|
2.96 (0.96)
|
1-4
|
-.57
|
-.61
|
|
6
|
When attending activities in the community others make me feel
unwelcome.
|
2.76 (0.94)
|
1-4
|
-.05
|
-1.06
|
|
7
|
When attending activities in the community,
I feel like I have nothing in
common with anyone else present.
|
2.53 (0.96)
|
1-4
|
.18
|
-.92
|
|
8
|
When attending activities in the community,
I think that I am no different from others in attendance.
|
3.07 (0.79)
|
1-4
|
-.60
|
.09
|
|
Total
|
|
21.00 (4.73)
|
11-32
|
|
|
Note. A higher score indicates a higher level of Sense of Acceptance in
Community Activities (SACA).
Internal consistencyThe item-scale correlations were
examined using Cronbach’s alpha. The overall coefficient alpha for the
SACA with eight-items was .76 and the values ranged from .24 to .64. As
a result of the item analysis, one item (number = 8), which had a low
item remainder coefficient (r = .24), was deleted and this resulted in
a minimal increase of the overall correlation coefficient alpha for the
scale from .76 to .77. Table 2 shows the internal consistency of SACA.
Table 2.
Internal consistency among items (N=55)
|
Item
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
0.32*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
0.33*
|
0.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
0.35**
|
0.38**
|
0.23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
0.25
|
0.27
|
0.27*
|
0.62***
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
0.33*
|
0.46***
|
0.14
|
0.45***
|
0.22
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
0.11
|
0.45***
|
0.35**
|
0.38**
|
0.28*
|
0.30*
|
|
|
|
8
|
-0.14
|
0.18
|
0.19
|
0.25
|
0.13
|
0.22
|
0.27*
|
|
Note. * p < .05. ** p
< .01. *** p < .001.Content validityExploratory factor analysis (EFA)Table
3 presents the results of EFA. Based on the criterion of an eigenvalue
greater than one (Kaiser, 1960), two factors were identified in the
first EFA model. In terms of factor loadings, seven items had loadings
from .53 to .78 with factor 1, and one item (#8) had a loading of .83
with factor 2. The first factor had a higher eigenvalue of 3.0,
explaining 38.1 % of total variance where the second factor had an
eigenvalue of 1.2, explaining 14.9 % of the total variance. However,
even though the eigenvalue of second factor is greater than one, the
examination of a scree plot suggests a one-factor solution because
there is only one large “break” between component 1 and component 2
(Figure 1) (Hatcher & Stepanski, 1994).
Table 3. Results of the exploratory factor analysis
(N=55)
|
Item number
|
Factor loading
|
|
Model 1
|
|
Model 2
|
|
Factor 1
|
Factor 2
|
|
Factor 1
|
|
1
|
.646
|
-.576
|
|
.573
|
|
2
|
.682
|
.144
|
|
.700
|
|
3
|
.527
|
.053
|
|
.523
|
|
4
|
.776
|
.113
|
|
.782
|
|
5
|
.653
|
.012
|
|
.653
|
|
6
|
.643
|
.117
|
|
.650
|
|
7
|
.576
|
.442
|
|
.635
|
|
8
|
.210
|
.829
|
|
N / A
|
Note.
Item 8 was excluded in the model 2.

In order to verify the one-factor
structure model, the second EFA model was conducted with seven-items.
The results of the second EFA indicate all seven items loaded on a
single factor, explaining 42.2 % of total variance. In addition, all
seven items are moderately or highly correlated with the factor (r =
.52 - .78). Therefore, based on the results from the item analysis and
EFA, item 8 was excluded in the final model.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)To
verify the one-factor structure with the seven-items derived from the
EFA, CFA was conducted. Given the results from the EFA, it was assumed
that seven items of SACA would load on a single factor. The results of
CFA indicate that a one-factor structure model is acceptable based on a
number of goodness of model fit statistics:
X2 = 15.62 (p = .34), RMSEA
= .046, NNFI = .99, and CFI = .99.
Construct validityIn
order to examine the construct validity of SACA, several measures that
were hypothesized to be correlated with the SACA were employed. Based
on the previous results of the item analysis and factor analyses, only
seven-items of SACA were used to examine correlation coefficients. The
results indicate that social inclusion is positively and moderately
associated with SACA (r = .52, p<.0001), while loneliness is
negatively and moderately related to SACA (r = -.51, p<.0001).
Stigma has negative moderate correlation with SACA (r = -.35, p<.05).
DiscussionThe
present study was designed to develop a measure of a Sense of
Acceptance in Community Activities (SACA). A feeling of acceptance when
attending functions in the community was considered as the first step
toward achieving a sense of belonging for people with severe
psychiatric disorders, which is a major component of psychological
integration. Consequently, the development of such a measure as the
SACA was deemed as essential. Based on the results obtained, the SACA
appears to be a promising measure with strong psychometric properties,
having good reliability, content validity, and construct validity.
One
item from the original measure was deleted. This item varied from other
items in that it dealt with what the respondent thought rather than the
respondents’ feelings. This finding may indicate a direction for the
extension of the measure with additional items that deal with the
respondents’ thoughts about community acceptance.
The stigma measure
did not correlate as highly as social inclusion and loneliness with the
SACA scale. This finding may be due to some of the items on the stigma
measure tapped a broader context than the other measures (i.e., Have
you seen or read things in the mass media about persons receiving
psychiatric treatment and their psychiatric disorders which you found
hurtful or offensive).
Other strengths of the SACA measure are
its brevity, feasibility, and more importantly the fact that the items
can be responded to with relative ease by the intended population for
whom it was designed, adults with severe psychiatric disorders.
Interviewers for the current study reported ease of administration of
the measure and found that respondents had no problems responding to
the items.
Given the brevity and ease of administration of the
SACA, it can serve as an evaluation tool to assess outcomes for
interventions designed to increase community integration of persons
with severe psychiatric disorders. However, we do recognize that the
scale was measured on a limited sample size who may not be
representative of those served in community mental health programs.
Therefore, there is a need for further research on this measure. Also,
the measure in the current study was used in an interview format. It
may be useful if this could be employed as a self administered measure.
This too would require additional evaluation. It was designed for a low
level of comprehension, due to some possible cognitive impairment of
the population. But given the potential for a low literacy level of
those with severe mental illness, the SACA scale may require further
refinement to ensure that the reading level of the measure is
consistent with the literacy level of the population.
This
measure serves to begin to fill the gap in existing measures to assess
community acceptance of persons with severe psychiatric disorders.
Given the importance of this goal for psychiatric rehabilitation, more
work is needed to develop appropriate measures for evaluating outcomes
of programs targeted to increasing community participation. This is a
small, but important, step toward meeting this need.
This
measure may be a useful assessment tool for mental health providers
working with this population. Since a major goal of mental health
services and policies is to achieve greater community integration for
this population, such a measure will offer direction for assisting
clients who are having difficulty in feeling unaccepted when attending
community activities. With this knowledge, mental health providers can
work with their clients to overcome these barriers, rather than being
discouraged from participation. With greater community participation
clients will likely increase their social networks, and therefore, have
more support resources available in times of crisis rather than totally
relying on professional resources.
References
Baumeister,
R., & Leary, M. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for
interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
Coyne, J., & Downey,
G. (1991). Social factors and psychopathology: Stress, social support,
and coping processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 401-425.
Cuijpers,
P., & Van Lameren, P. (1999). Depressive symptoms in chronically
ill elderly people in residential homes. Aging and Mental Health, 3(3),
221-226.
Dewees, M., Pulice, R. T., & McCormick, L. L.
(1996). Community integration of former state hospital patients:
Outcomes of a policy shift in Vermont. Psychiatric Services, 47,
1088-1092.
Dickerson, F., Sommerville, J., Origoni, A., Ringel,
N., & Parente, F. (2002). Experiences of stigma among outpatients
with schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 28(1), 143-155.
Elisha,
D., Castle, D., & Hocking, B. (2006). Reducing social isolation in
people with mental illness: The role of the psychiatrist. Australasian
Psychiatry, 14(3), 281-284.
Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J.
(2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation
for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological
Methods, 9(4), 466-491.
Granerud, A., & Severinsson, E.
(2006). The struggle for social integration in the community: The
experiences of people with mental health problems. Journal of
Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 13(3), 288-293.
Hagerty,
B. M. K., Lynch-Sauer, J., Patusky, K., Bouwsema, M., & Collier, P.
(1992). Sense of belonging: A vital mental health concept. Archives of
Psychiatric Nursing, 6(3), 172-177.
Hagerty, B. M. K., & Patusky, K. (1995). Developing a measure of sense of belonging. Nursing Research, 44(1), 9-13.
Hagerty,
B. M. K., Williams, R. A., Coyne, J. C., & Early, M. R. (1996).
Sense of belonging and indicators of social and psychological
functioning. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 10(4), 235-244.
Hatcher,
L., & Stepanski, E. J. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the
SAS system for univariate and multivariate statistics. Cary, NC: SAS
Institute Inc.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff
criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional
criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
Kaiser,
H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor
analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
Lehman, A. F. (1988). A quality of life interview for the chronically mentally ill. Evaluation and Program Planning, 11, 51-62.
Perese,
E., & Wolf, M. (2005). Combating loneliness among persons with
severe mental illness: Social network interventions' characteristics,
effectiveness, and applicability. Issues in Mental Health Nursing,
26(6), 591-609.
Prince, P. N., & Prince, C. R. (2002).
Perceived stigma and community integration among clients of assertive
community treatment. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25(4), 323-331.
Russel,
D., Peplau, L., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The Revised UCLA
Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and Discriminant Validity Evidence.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(3), 472-480.
Wong,
Y.-L. I., & Solomon, P. (2002). Community integration of persons
with psychiatric disabilities in supportive independent housing: A
conceptual model and methodological considerations. Mental Health
Services Research, 4(1), 13-28.