The Reliability and Validity of Chinese Translation of RSQ-SSV in Undergraduate Student
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To examine the reliability and validity of Chinese translation of the Responses to Stress Questionnaire in reference to current social stressors(RSQ-SSV).Methods:The English version of the RSQ-SSV was translated into Chinese and then back translated into English to verify that the Chinese version assessed the same constructs as the original version.Stratified chester sampling method was used to 409 university students.Means and standard deviations of the RSQ-SSV total scale and factors were compared to the normative samples reported by Connor-Smith(2004).Additionally,internal consistency,test-retest and confirmatory factor analyses were analyzed.Results:The internal consistency reliability for the total scale was 0.88,and for the five factors ranged from 0.73 to 0.81 and the four weeks test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.70.The mean inter-item correlation coefficient for the RSQ-SSV was 0.11,and the mean inter-item correlation coefficient for the five factors ranged from 0.19 to 0.29.The factors loadings ranged from 0.38 to 0.86.The squared multiple correlations were 0.14 to 0.74.And the results of confirmatory factor analyses(IFI 0.93,CFI 0.93,TLI 0.92,RMSEA 0.06) indicated that the five-factor structure of the RSQ-C was suitable for the Chinese sample.In comparison to normative samples,Chinese adolescents reported significantly higher scores on the Involuntary Disengagement than American sample[(0.97±0.41) vs.(0.91±0.48),P=0.002] and reported significantly lower scores on the Primary Control Engagement Coping,Secondary Control Engagement Coping and Involuntary Engagement than American sample[(1.75±0.49) vs.(2.12±0.50),(1.51±0.43) vs.(1.80±0.48),(1.17±0.44) vs.(1.36±0.56),P0.001].Conclusion: The Chinese version of the Responses to Stress Questionnaire(RSQ) in reference to current social stressors with acceptable psychometric quality can be applied in related psychological research areas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".