Journals / Turkish Thoracic Journal / 2018 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 4

Abstinence-Related Motivational Engagement Scale: Validity and Reliability in Turkish People

Pages
176–181
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It is considered that the scale might be used reliably in different cultures as well.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:OBJECTIVES: This research aimed to conduct a validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the abstinence-related motivational engagement (ARME) scale.MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 122 people and was administered in a smoking cessation clinic.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the reliability analysis, standard deviation (SD) and item analysis, internal consistency, and test-retest methods were used.RESULTS: The four factors explain 58% of the total variance.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is considered that the scale might be used reliably in different cultures as well.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

OBJECTIVES: This research aimed to conduct a validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the abstinence-related motivational engagement (ARME) scale.MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 122 people and was administered in a smoking cessation clinic. The sociodemographic-smoking status characteristics questionnaire and the ARME scale were used for data collection. A psycholinguistic language adaptation was performed. In the validity, analyses, content, construct, and criterion-related validities were used. For content validity, expert evaluation was performed. For construct validity, principal component analyses (exploratory factor analyses) were performed. Orthogonal (Varimax) rotation was used to explore multiple factors. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test was used to assess the adequacy of the sample size. For criterion-related validity, we compared the ARME scale points of people who were abstinent and had relapse for smoking at the end of the sixth month. In the reliability analysis, standard deviation (SD) and item analysis, internal consistency, and test-retest methods were used.RESULTS: The four factors explain 58% of the total variance. Items have factor loading between 0.409 and 0.805. When the factor structure of the scale was assessed, the items in each factor group have a factor load of at least “0.40.” Due to one-dimensional use of the original scale, it has been decided to maintain this scale in its original form. The ARME scale points of people who quit smoking were statistically higher than the points of people who had relapse at the end of the sixth month. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were between 0.846 and 0.763. Significant and positive correlation was found between the test-retest scale scores.CONCLUSION: The Turkish adaptation of the ARME scale, which was developed for adults who quitted smoking, is an adequately valid and reliable measurement instrument. It is considered that the scale might be used reliably in different cultures as well.

🔖

Cite This Article

YAVAN, T., GÜLEŞEN, A., BEBİŞ, H. (2018). Abstinence-Related Motivational Engagement Scale: Validity and Reliability in Turkish People. Turkish Thoracic Journal, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 4, 176–181. https://ajindex.com/articles/418032

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Solak ZA, Telli CG, Erdinç E. Results of Smoking Cessation Program. Turk Thorac J 2003;4:73-7
  2. Mayer C, Vandecasteele H, Bodo M, et al. Smoking Relapse Prevention Programs and Factors That Predict Abstinence: A Controlled Study Comparing the Efficacy of Workplace Group Counselling and Proactive Phone Counselling. J Smok Cessat 2010;5:83-94. [CrossRef] 3. Caponnetto P, Keller E, Bruno CM, et al. Handling Relapse in Smoking Cessation: Strategies and Recommendations. Intern Emerg Med 2013; 8:7-12. [CrossRef] 4. Hajek P, Stead LF, West R, et al. Relapse prevention interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;20:CD003999
  3. Argüder E, Karalezli A, Hezer H, et al. Factors Affecting the Success of Smoking Cessation. Turk Thorac J 2013;14:81-7. [CrossRef] 6. Hwang GS, Jung HS, Yi Y, et al. Smoking Cessation Intervention Using Stepwise Exercise Incentives for Male Workers in the Workplace. Asia Pac J Public Health 2012;24:82-90. [CrossRef] 7. Park ER. Behavioral approaches to smoking cessation. Literature review. UpToDate 2016; Topic 6920 Version 27.0
  4. Pineiro B, López-Durán A, del Río EF, et al. Motivation to quit as a predictor of smoking cessation and abstinence maintenance among treated Spanish smokers. Addict Behav 2016;53:40-45. [CrossRef] 9. Simmons VN, Heckman BW, Ditre JW, et al. A measure of smoking abstinence-related motivational engagement: Development and initial validation. Nicotine Tob Res 2010;12:432-7. [CrossRef] 10. Marlatt GA, George WH. Relapse prevention: Introduction and Overview of the Model. Br J Addict 1984;79:261-73. [CrossRef] 11. Ferguson M, Maidment D, Russell N, et al. Motivational engagement in first-time hearing aid users: A feasibility study. Int J Audiol 2016;55:23-33. [CrossRef] 12. Abrams K, Zvolensky MJ, Dorman L, et al. Development and Validation of the Smoking Abstinence Expectancies Questionnaire. Nicotine Tob Res 2011;13:1296-304. [CrossRef] 13. Shiffman S, Kassel J, Gwaltney C, et al. Relapse Prevention for Smoking. Marlatt GA, Donovan DM, editors. Relapse Prevention: Maintenance Strategies in the Treatment of Addictive Behaviors. 2nd Edition. New York: The Guilford Press; 2005.p.92-129
  5. Şencan H. Reliability and Validity in Social and Behavioral Measurements. First Edition. Ankara: Seçkin; 2005.p. 249-60; 384-6; 761-73
  6. Grove SK, Burns N. The Practice of Nursing Research: Appraisal, Synthesis, and Generation of Evidence. 6th Edition. St. Louis, Missouri: Saunders & Elsevier; 2009.p