4.2 Article

The Giscombe Superwoman Schema Questionnaire: Psychometric Properties and Associations with Mental Health and Health Behaviors in African American Women

期刊

ISSUES IN MENTAL HEALTH NURSING
卷 40, 期 8, 页码 672-681

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/01612840.2019.1584654

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Nursing Research
  2. National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health [NR03443]
  3. National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health [T32NR007091]
  4. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Minority Fellowship Program at the American Nurses Association
  5. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Nurse Faculty Scholars Program
  6. Josiah Macy Foundation (Macy Faculty Scholars Program)
  7. University of California, Berkeley (UCB) Hellman Fund, USA
  8. UCB Population Center, USA
  9. UCB Research Bridging Grant, USA
  10. UCB Experimental Social Science Laboratory, USA
  11. Robert Wood Johnson Health and Society Scholars Program (UCB site), USA
  12. UC Center for New Racial Studies, USA
  13. UCB Institute for the Study of Societal Issues, USA
  14. NIMHD, USA [P60MD006902]
  15. NIH [K12HD055892 NICHD/ORWH/NIH]
  16. Hillman Scholars Program in Nursing Innovation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this research was to examine the psychometric properties of the Giscombe Superwoman Schema Questionnaire. Three separate studies conducted with 739 African American women provided preliminary evidence that the Questionnaire's factor structure aligns with the Superwoman Schema Conceptual Framework and has good reliability. In addition, it is positively associated with perceived stress, depressive symptoms, using food to cope with stress, poor sleep quality, and physical inactivity. This study provides preliminary evidence to suggest that the Giscombe Superwoman Schema Questionnaire is psychometrically sound; Superwoman Schema is associated with health behaviors and psychological states that may increase risk for illness.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据