Background <p>This study aims to develop the Romanian version of the Cognitive Triad Inventory (CTI) by documenting the Romanian translation of the instrument items and its psychometric characteristics. We were concerned with the items’ adaptation, analyzed the scale’s reliability and the three subscales’ and assessed the construct validity of the Romanian sample.</p> Methods <p>The instrument contains 36 items that assess the cognitive triad, both positive and negative, and was administered to a nonclinical sample (<i>N</i> = 675). To maintain the conceptual equivalence of the original instrument, translation was executed according to literature standards, including forward and backward translation, expert reviews, to ensure cultural and contextual relevance.</p> Results <p>The confirmatory factor analysis on the Romanian scale items showed very good factorial validity in the present sample. The psychometric evaluation highlighted strong internal consistency with the global scale and the three dimensions: view of self, view of world, and view of future, supporting its robustness for research purposes. Convergent and discriminant validity were supported through correlations with a similar instrument. Three-month test–retest results indicated good stability over time. Cross-cultural configural invariance was preliminarily supported by significant correlations between Romanian factor loadings and those from German and Polish samples.</p> Conclusion <p>The findings underscored the CTI’s utility in assessing cognitive patterns within diverse cultural contexts.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

The Cognitive Triad Inventory (CTI) psychometric properties on a Romanian sample

  • Anca -Monica Puia,
  • Alexandru Mihalcea,
  • Violeta Ștefania Rotărescu

摘要

Background

This study aims to develop the Romanian version of the Cognitive Triad Inventory (CTI) by documenting the Romanian translation of the instrument items and its psychometric characteristics. We were concerned with the items’ adaptation, analyzed the scale’s reliability and the three subscales’ and assessed the construct validity of the Romanian sample.

Methods

The instrument contains 36 items that assess the cognitive triad, both positive and negative, and was administered to a nonclinical sample (N = 675). To maintain the conceptual equivalence of the original instrument, translation was executed according to literature standards, including forward and backward translation, expert reviews, to ensure cultural and contextual relevance.

Results

The confirmatory factor analysis on the Romanian scale items showed very good factorial validity in the present sample. The psychometric evaluation highlighted strong internal consistency with the global scale and the three dimensions: view of self, view of world, and view of future, supporting its robustness for research purposes. Convergent and discriminant validity were supported through correlations with a similar instrument. Three-month test–retest results indicated good stability over time. Cross-cultural configural invariance was preliminarily supported by significant correlations between Romanian factor loadings and those from German and Polish samples.

Conclusion

The findings underscored the CTI’s utility in assessing cognitive patterns within diverse cultural contexts.