10.07.2015 Views

COUV ACTES - Psychologie communautaire

COUV ACTES - Psychologie communautaire

COUV ACTES - Psychologie communautaire

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Community Psychology: Common Values, Diverse PracticesIndividual item fit – Item-trait interaction test of fit (test X²): to verify the one-dimensionality of the items. Throughan iterative procedure it was possible to remove all the items that showed a poor fit to the model. The resultsshow that the Item Trait Interaction Test is not significance as a measure of the uni-dimensionality of the scale,both in the subscale Sport Risk and Health Risk. The PSI (Person Separation Index), as a measure of the scale’sreliability, shows rather high values (0,78 FH, 0,77 MH; 0,82 FS; 0,79 MS) in the subscale Health Risk. The PLP(Person Location Parameter), as a measure of the perceived risk, shows higher values in the females, gettingeven higher levels of perceived risk (1.342 FH, 0.660 MH; 0.161 FS, 0.004 MS). So in relation to the firstobjective we get a different composition of the scale for the group of males and the female.Individual person fit – Differential item functioning (DIF) allows to inquire if the response at each item isinfluenced by the subjects’ variables (type of institution and level of education). DIF analysis showed a significantdifference in perceived risk about some items (tab.1).TipologyClassFHFSMHMSp15*, p16*p1**, p6**P1**,p6*,p14*,p21**P2**,p13**p14*P2***, p9**, p10*, p26***P6**, p17*** 0,05, ** 0,01, *** 0,001Tab.1 - Differential item functioning analysis.So the probability of the individual response to a particular item varies depending on the values of the individuals’characteristics (Person factor).We found high levels of correlation (Tab.2) between the HR and SR subscales; this result shows that theactivities depend on the risk associated with, in a similar way by males and females.ConclusionsOverall, we can draw the following conclusions:Males and females, in the scale’s one-dimensional form, have a different way to "perceive the risk." PLP. MRsuggests that PRAI is composed by two scales about gender.For some activities, the type of institution and level of education affect the risk (Person factor).Correlation between subscales shows that the process of risk perception/attribution is similar in both sexes, with adifferent intensity.343

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!