Psychometric characteristics of the Parenting Scale in a Vietnamese sample

Abstract

The Parenting Scale (PS) is a well-established instrument for measuring discipline practices in Western populations. However, whether the PS is a valid and reliable measure in Eastern populations is not known. Thus, this study examined the psychometric properties of the PS in a sample of 433 Vietnamese parents of children aged 2-7 years. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) examined the commonly used Reitman et al.'s two-factor and Rhoades and O'Leary's three-factor solutions. Neither factor structure fit the data. An exploratory factor analysis identified a 12-item one-factor and 14-item two-factor solutions that overlapped substantially with established factor structures. The one-factor solution reflected Lax/Overreactive parenting and the two-factor solution consisted of Lax/Overreactive and Hostile subscales. The factor structures were confirmed via multigroup CFA. Internal consistencies were acceptable and ranged between .70 and .85. Each factor was positively associated with parent anger, dysfunctional cognitions about child behaviour, and externalising child behaviour problems. However, when entered simultaneously in a regression, Hostile discipline was not uniquely associated with child behaviour. Overall, results support the potential utility of the 12-item one-factor PS as a measure of dysfunctional parenting practices for Vietnamese parents.

The psychometric properties of the parenting scale for Spanish mothers with children aged between 2 and 7 years

“…In agreement with previous studies (Collett et al, 2001;Del Vecchio, Jerusalmi, & Terjesen, 2017;Harvey et al, 2001;Irvine et al, 1999;Karazsia et al, 2008;Kliem et al, 2019;Prinzie et al, 2007;Reitman et al, 2001;Rhoades & O'Leary, 2007;Salari et al, 2012), our data did not confirm the original three-factor structure proposed by Arnold et al (1993). A subsequent CFA showed that the model reported by Irvine et al (1999) provided the best fit in our sample.…”

“…The instrument was validated observing parenting behavior and child misbehavior, distinguishing between mothers of children in clinical and non-clinical populations (Arnold et al, 1993). Since the publication of the PS, several studies have examined its dimensionality using exploratory and confirmatory approaches (Arney et al, 2008;Collett et al, 2001;Del Vecchio, Jerusalmi, & Terjesen, 2017;Harvey et al, 2001;Irvine et al, 1999;Karazsia et al, 2008;Kliem et al, 2019;Prinzie et al, 2007;Reitman et al, 2001;Rhoades & O'Leary, 2007;Salari et al, 2012;Steele et al, 2005). However, only Arney et al (2008) identified a factor structure that was similar to the original one reported by Arnold et al (1993), and even then they reported low internal consistency and test-retest reliability for verbosity.…”

Development and evaluation of the psychometric properties of a brief parenting scale (PS-7) for the parents of adolescents

“…To operationalise parenting style, Arnold, O'Leary [15] developed a parenting scale (PS) based on a sample of 168 mothers of children ranging from 18 to 48 months old (98 boys and 70 girls). Subsequent studies suggested that the scale was applicable not only to mothers of toddlers, but also to parents of both genders with children and young adolescents attending primary and secondary schools [16][17][18][19][20][21]. The PS has since been widely accepted internationally as a measure of parenting behaviour [16].…”

“…The PS has since been widely accepted internationally as a measure of parenting behaviour [16]. The original and adapted versions of the scale have been translated into numerous languages, including Chinese [17], Dutch [18], French [22], German [16,19], Japanese [23,24], Persian [19], Spanish [25], Swedish [20] and Vietnamese [21]. The scale has also been used to examine the behaviour of parents in different contexts, such as community-based paediatric practices for routine care in America [26], Australian mothers with preschool-aged children [27], parents of school-aged children with ADHD [28] and clinical populations [29].…”