Investigating method effects associated with the wording direction of items of the Social Physique Anxiety Scale

• Autor(a) principal: Silva, Wanderson Roberto da
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Soler Donofre, Giovanna, Neves, Angela, Maroco, J. P., Teixeira, Patrícia Angélica, Alvares Duarte Bonini Campos, Juliana
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.12/8775
• topic: Method efect; Item wording direction; Methodological artifact; Scale; Social physique anxiety

Purpose The use of psychometric instruments to measure latent concepts is common. The development of these instruments usually involves mechanisms to reduce response bias, such as the inclusion of reversed items. The aim of this study was to investigate method efects related to the wording direction of the Social Physique Anxiety Scale (SPAS) items, a onedimensional instrument that assesses individual’s level of anxiety when others observe their body. Methods In total, 152 Brazilian adults (65.8% female) answered 2 formats of the SPAS: the original with 12 items (7 regular and 5 reversed); and a new format with all items written in the same direction (i.e., regular). Both formats were flled out at diferent times and alternately. Diferential item functioning analysis (DIF) and confrmatory factor analysis were conducted. Results The original SPAS did not ft the data, but after allowing covariances between all reversed items, the ft improved. The wording efect was supported by the DIF, indicating a better ft to the data for the new format with all items worded in the same direction. Conclusion The wording of the SPAS items had efect on the psychometric properties of instrument. When the wording of the reversed items was modifed, the factor model ftted the data. Future studies should take these fndings into account and evaluate the SPAS with all items worded in the same direction in diferent contexts. Level of evidence Descriptive (cross-sectional) study, Level V.