One rule for one, and a different rule for another: The case of the Parental Rules about Alcohol Questionnaire.

Adolescent Alcohol Confirmatory factor analysis Parental rules United Kingdom

Journal

Drug and alcohol dependence
ISSN: 1879-0046
Titre abrégé: Drug Alcohol Depend
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 7513587

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 08 2021
Historique:
received: 08 03 2021
revised: 06 05 2021
accepted: 07 05 2021
pubmed: 30 6 2021
medline: 23 9 2021
entrez: 29 6 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The parental rules about alcohol questionnaire (Van der Vorst et al., 2005, 2006) uses 10 items to assess how strictly adolescents believe the rules set by their parents about drinking are. An increasing body of literature has attested to the importance of rule setting in the prevention of problematic alcohol use among adolescents. A recent study proposed a two-factor solution in place of the hypothesized unidimensional one, with factors assessing non-normative, and normative rules. The present study used five waves of data to examine the structure of the scale, and how well it relates to a measure of heavy episodic drinking (HED). Participants in Waves one to four {10,954-9,383} were substantively more numerous than those at wave five (N = 2,332). Confirmatory Factor Analyses did not support either the ten-item hypothesized model, nor the proposed two-factor solution. Results of exploratory factor analyses all pointed to a one factor solution. Using Modification Indices, we obtained a good-fitting, five-item unidimensional model in Waves one to four. At wave five, a good fitting unidimensional model was obtained with the dropping of a further item. Scores on this shortened scale were internally consistent, correlated highly with scores on the original ten-item version, and correlated to a similar degree as the original 10-item measure, with scores on a HED measure. Further work is required in assessing the properties of this scale across cultures and samples before definitively determining that two factors best represent parental rules.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The parental rules about alcohol questionnaire (Van der Vorst et al., 2005, 2006) uses 10 items to assess how strictly adolescents believe the rules set by their parents about drinking are. An increasing body of literature has attested to the importance of rule setting in the prevention of problematic alcohol use among adolescents. A recent study proposed a two-factor solution in place of the hypothesized unidimensional one, with factors assessing non-normative, and normative rules.
METHODS
The present study used five waves of data to examine the structure of the scale, and how well it relates to a measure of heavy episodic drinking (HED). Participants in Waves one to four {10,954-9,383} were substantively more numerous than those at wave five (N = 2,332).
RESULTS
Confirmatory Factor Analyses did not support either the ten-item hypothesized model, nor the proposed two-factor solution. Results of exploratory factor analyses all pointed to a one factor solution. Using Modification Indices, we obtained a good-fitting, five-item unidimensional model in Waves one to four. At wave five, a good fitting unidimensional model was obtained with the dropping of a further item. Scores on this shortened scale were internally consistent, correlated highly with scores on the original ten-item version, and correlated to a similar degree as the original 10-item measure, with scores on a HED measure.
CONCLUSION
Further work is required in assessing the properties of this scale across cultures and samples before definitively determining that two factors best represent parental rules.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34186445
pii: S0376-8716(21)00319-7
doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108824
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

108824

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Michael T McKay (MT)

Department of Psychology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. Electronic address: michaelmckay@rcsi.com.

John L Perry (JL)

Department of Psychology, Mary Immaculate College, Limerick, Ireland. Electronic address: John.Perry@mic.ul.ie.

Jon C Cole (JC)

Department of Psychology, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom. Electronic address: J.C.Cole@liverpool.ac.uk.

Andrew Percy (A)

School of Social Sciences, Education and Social Work, Queens University, Belfast, United Kingdom. Electronic address: a.percy@qub.ac.uk.

Harry R Sumnall (HR)

Public Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, United Kingdom. Electronic address: h.sumnall@ljmu.ac.uk.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH