Scholarlink

Background <p>As a result of the changes in fertility patterns in the present era, the trend in fertility levels and demographic development has become a focus of attention for all sectors of society. Previous studies have mostly measured childbearing levels in terms of people’s external manifestations of fertility intentions, and there is a relative lack of research on childbearing motivation, the antecedent of individual fertility intentions. At the same time, there is a lack of validated scales of childbearing motivation with a complete evaluation system. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Childbearing Motivation Scale, which provides a reference for improving fertility intentions and overall childbearing levels in the reproductive age group.</p> Methods <p>Selected 666 people in the reproductive age group in three cities in Liaoning Province. The reliability of the scale was validated using internal consistency, split-half reliability, and test-retest reliability. The validity of the scale was verified using face validity, content validity, construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. The age variable was tested for measurement invariance using a multi-group validated factor analysis.</p> Results <p>The Chinese version of the Childbearing Motivation Scale consists of 2 subscales, positive childbearing motivation subscales, and negative childbearing motivation subscales, with 9 dimensions and 37 entries. Cronbach’s alpha values for the total scale and dimensions ranged from 0.864 to 0.954. The I-CVI for the scale ranged from 0.833 to 1.000 and the S-CVI was 0.933. Exploratory factor analysis extracted nine metrics explaining 66.453% of the total variance. The results of the validation factor analysis showed that the fit of the model’s indicators was within an acceptable range.</p> Conclusions <p>The Chinese version of the Childbearing Motivation Scale has good psychometric properties and can be used as a valid measurement tool for evaluating childbearing motivation in reproductive age groups. At the same time, it will help to develop suitable education and intervention strategies for healthy reproduction for the reproductive age group.</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 Childbearing Motivation Scale (C-CMS): translation, reliability and validity testing

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月18日

查看全文
  • Jiaxin Cheng,
  • Xiaoting Wang,
  • Jia Liu,
  • Jinrui Fei,
  • Chuang Li,
  • Ge Tian,
  • Hongxia Wang

摘要

Background

As a result of the changes in fertility patterns in the present era, the trend in fertility levels and demographic development has become a focus of attention for all sectors of society. Previous studies have mostly measured childbearing levels in terms of people’s external manifestations of fertility intentions, and there is a relative lack of research on childbearing motivation, the antecedent of individual fertility intentions. At the same time, there is a lack of validated scales of childbearing motivation with a complete evaluation system. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Childbearing Motivation Scale, which provides a reference for improving fertility intentions and overall childbearing levels in the reproductive age group.

Methods

Selected 666 people in the reproductive age group in three cities in Liaoning Province. The reliability of the scale was validated using internal consistency, split-half reliability, and test-retest reliability. The validity of the scale was verified using face validity, content validity, construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. The age variable was tested for measurement invariance using a multi-group validated factor analysis.

Results

The Chinese version of the Childbearing Motivation Scale consists of 2 subscales, positive childbearing motivation subscales, and negative childbearing motivation subscales, with 9 dimensions and 37 entries. Cronbach’s alpha values for the total scale and dimensions ranged from 0.864 to 0.954. The I-CVI for the scale ranged from 0.833 to 1.000 and the S-CVI was 0.933. Exploratory factor analysis extracted nine metrics explaining 66.453% of the total variance. The results of the validation factor analysis showed that the fit of the model’s indicators was within an acceptable range.

Conclusions

The Chinese version of the Childbearing Motivation Scale has good psychometric properties and can be used as a valid measurement tool for evaluating childbearing motivation in reproductive age groups. At the same time, it will help to develop suitable education and intervention strategies for healthy reproduction for the reproductive age group.