Preliminary development and evaluation of the Responsive Caregiving Rating Scale for children aged 0 to 4 years

doi:10.11852/zgetbjzz2021-0474

Abstract

Abstract: Objective To develop the Responsive Caregiving Rating Scale for children aged 0 to 4 years (RCRS), and to testify its reliability and validity. Methods Based on attachment theory and the existing responsive caregiving scales, the original items of the scale were formed. A total of 2 759 parents whose children aged 0 to 4 years in Shanghai were recruited from March to May 2020, and each parent was asked to fill in an online questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were performed to test the structural validity. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was used to test the concurrent validity. Results The exploratory factor analysis indicated that RCRS had 16 items grouped into three dimensions, which explained 78.04% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis showed that the three-dimension model fit well (CFI=0.971, TLI=0.965, RMSEA=0.069, SRMR=0.024). The Cronbach's α coefficient for the overall scale was 0.97, which in the dimensions of promotion of cognitive and emotional development, responsive, respect for autonomy was 0.95, 0.93 and 0.91, respectively. The scores of RCRS were significantly different between the normal and the abnormal children evaluated by SDQ(Z=7.071,P<0.05). Conclusion The RCRC is demonstrated to be an ideal tool with good reliability and validity to assess the quality of responsive caregiving.

Key words: responsive caregiving, rating scale, reliability, validity, infants and toddlers

摘要： 目的开发适用于评价婴幼儿照护人回应性照护水平的量表,并检验其信效度。方法以依恋理论为基础,参考国际上回应性照护评估量表,初步构建量表条目,2020年3—5月对2 759名0~4岁儿童家长进行问卷调查,进一步检验量表信效度。采用探索性因子分析与验证性因子分析检验量表的结构效度,长处与困难问卷(SDQ)被用于检测量表的同时效度。结果探索性因子分析显示婴幼儿回应性照护评价量表包含“促进认知与情感发展”、“回应性”和“尊重自主性”3个因子,共16个条目,三因素模型可解释78.04%的总方差,验证性因子分析表明三因子构造模型拟合程度良好(CFI=0.971,TLI=0.965,RMSEA=0.069,SRMR=0.024)。总量表的Cronbach's α系数为0.97,“促进认知与情感发展”、“回应性”和“尊重自主性”这三个维度的Cronbach's α系数分别为0.95、0.93、0.91;心理行为问题筛查正常组与异常组儿童家长的回应性照护水平差异有统计学意义(Z=7.071,P<0.05),表明量表效度良好。结论婴幼儿回应性照护评价量表具有良好的信效度,适用于评价婴幼儿照护人员的回应性照护质量。

关键词: 回应性照护, 量表, 信度, 效度, 婴幼儿

CLC Number:

R174

HUANG Ying, ZHANG Hai-feng, TONG Lian. Preliminary development and evaluation of the Responsive Caregiving Rating Scale for children aged 0 to 4 years[J]. Chinese Journal of Child Health Care, 2022, 30(4): 386-391.

黄楹, 张海峰, 童连. 婴幼儿回应性照护评价量表的初步编制与评价[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(4): 386-391.

References

[1] Brebner C, Hammond L, Schaumloffel N, et al. Using relationships as a tool: early childhood educators' perspectives of the child-caregiver relationship in a childcare setting[J]. Early Child Dev Care, 2015,185(5):709-726.
[2] World Health Organization, United Nations Children S Fund, World Bank Group. Nurturing care for early childhood development: a framework for helping children survive and thrive to transform health and humanpotential[R]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2018.
[3] Kovach BA, Da Ros DA. Respectful, individual, and responsive caregiving for infants: The key to successful care in group settings.[J]. Young Children, 1998,53(3):61-64.
[4] Anme T. The validity and reliability of interaction rating scale (IRS):Characteristics for children with behavioral or environmental difficulties[J]. Japanese Journal of Human Sciences of Health-social Services, 2007,14:23-31.
[5] Administration for Children and Families. Measuring the Quality of Caregiver-Child Interactions for Infants and Toddlers (Q-CCIIT)[EB/OL]. [2021-3-25]. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/report/measuring-quality-caregiver-child-interactions-infants-and-toddlers-q-cciit.
[6] Duval ELCO. The Infant/Toddler Responsive Caregiver Checklist[EB/OL]. [2021-3-25]. https://elcduval.org/wp-content/uploads/gsod/091613%20ITRCC%20-%20Resource%20Guide%20-%20GSOD%202.0%20-%20FINAL%202013.pdf.
[7] Holmes J. Attachment theory in clinical practice:A personal account[J].Brit J Psychotherapy,2015,31(2):208-228.
[8] Bretherton I. The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth.[J]. Dev Psychol, 1992,28(5):759.
[9] Goodman R. Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire[J]. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2001,40(11):1337-1345.
[10] 寇建华, 杜亚松, 夏黎明. 儿童长处和困难问卷(父母版)上海常模的信度和效度[J]. 上海精神医学, 2005(01):25-28.
[11] 方积乾. 现代医学统计学[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2015.
[12] 孙振球. 医学统计学[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2010.
[13] Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al. Multivariate data analysis[M]. Prentice hall Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998.
[14] 苏为华. 多指标综合评价理论与方法问题研究[D]. 厦门: 厦门大学, 2000.
[15] Park MS, Kang KJ, Jang SJ, et al. Evaluating test-retest reliability in patient-reported outcome measures for older people: A systematic review[J]. Int J Nurs Stud, 2018,79: 58-69.
[16] 陆爱军, 王永强, 王永飞, 等. 上海市松江区7~16岁中小学生情绪和行为问题调查[J]. 精神医学杂志, 2015,28(2):99-101.
[17] Anme T, Shinohara R, Sugisawa Y, et al. Gender differences of children's social skills and parenting using Interaction Rating Scale (IRS)[J]. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2010,2(2):260-268.
[18] Anme T, Shinohara R, Sugisawa Y, et al. Interaction Rating Scale (IRS) as an evidence-based practical index of children's social skills and parenting[J]. J Epidemiol, 2010,20(Suppl 2):419-426.
[19] 吴瑞, 陈佳, 颜引妹, 等. 镇江市学龄前儿童情绪行为问题现况调查及其影响因素分析[J]. 现代预防医学, 2020,47(4):616-619.
[20] Du Y, Kou J, Coghill D. The validity, reliability and normative scores of the parent, teacher and self report versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in China[J]. Child Adol Psych Men, 2008,2(1):8.
[21] Mikulincer M, Shaver PR. Attachment, Caregiving, and Parenting[M].Springer International Publishing, 2019:305-319.
[22] Scherer E, Hagaman A, Chung E, et al. The relationship between responsive caregiving and child outcomes:Evidence from direct observations of mother-child dyads in Pakistan[J]. BMC Public Health, 2019,19(1):252.
[23] Shaw DS, Keenan K, Vondra JI. Developmental precursors of externalizing behavior: ages 1 to 3[J]. Dev Psychol, 1994,30(3):355.
[24] Shonkoff J, Richmond J, Levitt P, et al. From best practices to breakthrough impacts:A science-based approach to building a more promising future for young children and families[R]. Cambirdge, MA: Harvard University, Center on the Developing Child, 2016:747-756.