A short form of the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE-6): Development, psychometric properties and validity in an intercultural non-clinical sample and a sample of patients at risk for heart failure

Matthias Romppel, Christoph Herrmann-Lingen, Rolf Wachter, Frank Edelmann, Hans-Dirk Düngen, Burkert Pieske, Gesine Grande, Matthias Romppel, Christoph Herrmann-Lingen, Rolf Wachter, Frank Edelmann, Hans-Dirk Düngen, Burkert Pieske, Gesine Grande

Abstract

Objective: General self-efficacy has been found to be an influential variable related to the adaptation to stress and chronic illness, with the General Self-Efficacy (GSE) Scale by Jerusalem and Schwarzer being a reliable and valid instrument to assess this disposition. The aim of this study was to construct and test a short form of this scale to allow for a more economical assessment of the construct.

Methods: The item characteristics of the original scale were assessed using an intercultural non-clinical sample (n=19,719). Six items with the highest coefficient of variation and good discrimination along the range of the trait were selected to build a short form of the instrument (GSE-6). Subsequently, the psychometric properties and the concurrent and predictive validity of the GSE-6 were tested in a longitudinal design with three measurements using a sample of patients with risk factors for heart failure (n=1,460).

Results: Cronbach's alpha for the GSE-6 was between .79 and .88. We found negative associations with symptoms of depression (-.35 and -.45), anxiety (-.35), and vital exhaustion (-.38) and positive associations with social support (.30), and mental health (.36). In addition, the GSE-6 score was positively associated with active problem-focused coping (.26) and distraction/self-encouragement (.25) and negatively associated with depressive coping (-.34). The baseline GSE-6 score predicted mental health and physical health after 28 months, even after controlling for the respective baseline score. The relative stability over twelve and 28 months was r=.50 and r=.60, respectively, while the mean self-efficacy score did not change over time.

Conclusions: The six item short form of the GSE scale is a reliable and valid instrument that is useful for the economical assessment of general self-efficacy in large multivariate studies and for screening purposes.

Keywords: heart diseases; psychometrics; questionnaires; self efficacy.

Figures

Table 1. Item characteristics and estimated item…
Table 1. Item characteristics and estimated item parameters for the items of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in sample 1 (n=19,719)
Table 2. Correlations between GSE-6 scores and…
Table 2. Correlations between GSE-6 scores and other self-report scale scores in sample 2 (n=1,460)

References

    1. Benyon K, Hill S, Zadurian N, Mallen C. Coping strategies and self-efficacy as predictors of outcome in osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Musculoskeletal Care. 2010 Dec;8(4):224–236. doi: 10.1002/msc.187. Available from: .
    1. O'Brien CW, Moorey S. Outlook and adaptation in advanced cancer: a systematic review. Psychooncology. 2010;19:1239–1249. doi: 10.1002/pon.1704. Available from: .
    1. Jones F, Riazi A. Self-efficacy and self-management after stroke: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33(10):797–810. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2010.511415. Available from: .
    1. Korpershoek C, van der Bijl J, Hafsteinsdóttir TB. Self-efficacy and its influence on recovery of patients with stroke: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2011 Sep;67(9):1876–1894. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05659.x. Available from: .
    1. Mavros MN, Athanasiou S, Gkegkes ID, Polyzos KA, Peppas G, Falagas ME. Do psychological variables affect early surgical recovery? PLoS ONE. 2011;6(5):e20306. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020306. Available from: .
    1. Stewart DE, Yuen T. A systematic review of resilience in the physically ill. Psychosomatics. 2011 May-Jun;52(3):199–209. doi: 10.1016/j.psym.2011.01.036. Available from: .
    1. Peter C, Müller R, Cieza A, Geyh S. Psychological resources in spinal cord injury: a systematic literature review. Spinal Cord. 2012 Mar;50(3):188–201. doi: 10.1038/sc.2011.125. Available from: .
    1. Sullivan MD, LaCroix AZ, Russo J, Katon WJ. Self-efficacy and self-reported functional status in coronary heart disease: a six-month prospective study. Psychosom Med. 1998 Jul-Aug;60(4):473–478.
    1. Johnston-Brooks CH, Lewis MA, Garg S. Self-efficacy impacts self-care and HbA1c in young adults with Type I diabetes. Psychosom Med. 2002 Jan-Feb;64(1):43–51.
    1. Wenzel LB, Donnelly JP, Fowler JM, Habbal R, Taylor TH, Aziz N, Cella D. Resilience, reflection, and residual stress in ovarian cancer survivorship: a gynecologic oncology group study. Psychooncology. 2002 Mar-Apr;11(2):142–153. doi: 10.1002/pon.567. Available from: .
    1. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977 Mar;84(2):191–215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191. Available from: .
    1. Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M, editors. Measures in health psychology: A user's portfolio. Causal and control beliefs. Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON; 1995. pp. 35–37.
    1. Scholz U, Gutiérrez-Doña B, Sud S, Schwarzer R. Is general self-efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2002;18:242–251. doi: 10.1027//1015-5759.18.3.242. Available from: .
    1. Luszczynska A, Scholz U, Schwarzer R. The general self-efficacy scale: multicultural validation studies. J Psychol. 2005 Sep;139(5):439–457. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.139.5.439-457. Available from: .
    1. Hampton NZ. Self-efficacy and quality of life in people with spinal cord injuries in China. Rehabil Couns Bull. 2000;42:66–74. doi: 10.1177/003435520004300202. Available from: .
    1. Rimm H, Jerusalem M. Adaptation and validation of an Estonian version of the General Self-Efficacy Scale. Anxiety Stress Coping. 1999;12:329–345. doi: 10.1080/10615809908250481. Available from: .
    1. Smith GT, McCarthy DM, Anderson KG. On the sins of short-form development. Psychol Assess. 2000 Mar;12(1):102–111. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.102. Available from: .
    1. Smith GT, McCarthy DM. Methodological considerations in the refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychol Assess. 1995;7:300–308. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.300. Available from: .
    1. Schwarzer R. General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE. [cited March 5, 2012]. Available from: .
    1. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
    1. Samejima F. Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. 1969. (Psychometrika Monograph Supplement;17).
    1. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. MPlus User's Guide. Sixth ed. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 2010.
    1. Stahrenberg R, Edelmann F, Mende M, Kockskämper A, Düngen HD, Scherer M, Kochen MM, Binder L, Herrmann-Lingen C, Schönbrunn L, Gelbrich G, Hasenfuss G, Pieske B, Wachter R. Association of glucose metabolism with diastolic function along the diabetic continuum. Diabetologia. 2010 Jul;53(7):1331–1340. doi: 10.1007/s00125-010-1718-8. Available from: .
    1. Edelmann F, Stahrenberg R, Polzin F, Kockskämper A, Düngen HD, Duvinage A, Binder L, Kunde J, Scherer M, Gelbrich G, Hasenfuss G, Pieske B, Wachter R, Herrmann-Lingen C. Impaired physical quality of life in patients with diastolic dysfunction associates more strongly with neurohumoral activation than with echocardiographic parameters: quality of life in diastolic dysfunction. Am Heart J. 2011 Apr;161(4):797–804. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.01.003. Available from: .
    1. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:606–613. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x. Available from: .
    1. Löwe B, Spitzer RL, Zipfel S, Herzog W. PHQ-D: Gesundheitsfragebogen für Patienten. 2. Aufl. Karlsruhe: Pfizer; 2002.
    1. Ware JE, Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473–483. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002. Available from: .
    1. Bullinger M, Kirchberger I. SF-36. Fragebogen zum Gesundheitszustand. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 1998.
    1. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 Jun;67(6):361–370. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x. Available from: .
    1. Herrmann-Lingen C, Buss U, Snaith RP. HADS-D - Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Deutsche Version. 3. aktualisierte und neu normierte Aufl. Bern: Hans Huber; 2011.
    1. Appels A, Höppener P, Mulder P. A questionnaire to assess premonitory symptoms of myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol. 1987 Oct;17(1):15–24. doi: 10.1016/0167-5273(87)90029-5. Available from: .
    1. Enhancing recovery in coronary heart disease patients (ENRICHD): study design and methods. The ENRICHD investigators. Am Heart J. 2000 Jan;139(1 Pt 1):1–9.
    1. Cordes A, Herrmann-Lingen C, Büchner B, Hessel A. Repräsentative Normierung des ENRICHD-Social-Support-Instrument (ESSI) - Deutsche Version. Klinische Diagnostik und Evaluation. 2009;2:16–32.
    1. Muthny FA. Freiburger Fragebogen zur Krankheitsverarbeitung. Weinheim: Beltz; 1989.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться