This study examined the psychometric properties of the General Self-Efficacy Scale by applying Rasch analysis to data from 102 persons with spinal cord injury. Our results suggest that the General Self-Efficacy Scale is a psychometrically robust instrument suitable for application in a spinal cord injury population. The General Self-Efficacy Scale shows an overall fit to the Rasch model (χ2 = 15.5, df = 20, p = .75), high reliability (rp = 0.92), ordered response scale structure, and no item bias by gender, age, education, and lesion levels. However, the analyses indicate a ceiling effect and potential to enhance the differentiation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale across self-efficacy levels.
AndrichD (1988) Rasch Models for Measurement. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
3.
AndrichD (2004) Controversy and the Rasch model: A characteristic of incompatible paradigms?Medical Care42(1 Suppl.): I-7–I-16.
4.
AndrichDHumphrySMMaraisI (2012) Quantifying local, response dependence between two polytomous items using the Rasch model. Applied Psychological Measurement36(4): 309–324.
5.
AndrichDSheridanBLuoG (2009) RUMM 2030 (Beta Version for Windows). Perth, WA, Australia: RUMM Laboratory Pty Ltd.
6.
AntoniMH (2003) Stress management and psychoneuroimmunology in HIV infection. CNS Spectrums8(1): 40–51.
7.
Arbour-NicitopoulosKPGinisKALatimerAE (2009) Planning, leisure-time physical activity, and coping self-efficacy in persons with spinal cord injury: A randomized controlled trial. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation90(12): 2003–2011.
8.
AtkinsonPAMartinCRRankinJ (2009) Resilience revisited. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing16: 137–145.
9.
BaghaeiP (2008) Local dependency and Rasch measures. Rasch Measurement Transactions21(3): 1105–1106.
10.
BanduraA (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review84: 191–215.
11.
BlandJMAltmanDG (1995) Multiple significance tests: The Bonferroni method. British Medical Journal310: 170.
12.
BondTGFoxCM (2001) Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13.
EmbretsonSEReiseSP (2000) Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14.
FisherW. P. (1992). Reliability statistics. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 6(3), 238.
15.
FlückigerCWüstenGZinbargRE. (2010) Resource Activation: Using Clients’ Own Strengths in Psychotherapy and Counseling. Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe Publishing.
16.
GadottiICVieiraERMageeDJ (2006) Importance and clarification of measurement properties in rehabilitation. Revista Brasileira de Fisioterapia10(2): 137–146.
17.
GeyhSFellinghauerBAGKirchbergerI. (2010) Cross-cultural validity of four quality of life scales in persons with spinal cord injury. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes8: 94.
18.
HagquistCAndrichD (2004) Is the sense of coherence-instrument applicable on adolescents? A latent trait analysis using Rasch-modelling. Personality and Individual Differences36: 955–968.
19.
HanssonL (2006) Determinants of quality of life in people with severe mental illness. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica113(Suppl. 429): 46–50.
20.
HobfollSE (2002) Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology6(4): 307–324.
21.
KennedyPTaylorNHindsonL (2006) A pilot investigation of a psychosocial activity course for people with spinal cord injuries. Psychology, Health & Medicine11(1): 91–99.
KucukdeveciAAKutlaySYildizlarD. (2013) The reliability and validity of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-II) in stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation. 35(5): 214–220.
24.
LaiJTeresiJGershonR (2005) Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes. Evaluation & the Health Professions28(3): 283–294.
25.
LatimerAEGinisKAMArbourKP (2006) The efficacy of an implementation intention intervention for promoting physical activity among individuals with spinal cord injury: A randomized controlled trial. Rehabilitation Psychology51(4): 273–280.
26.
LinVW (2003) Spinal Cord Medicine: Principles and Practice. New York: Demos.
LordFMNovickMR (1968) Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
31.
Lundgren-NilssonATennantA (2011) Past and present issues in Rasch analysis: The functional independence measure (FIM) revisited. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine43: 884–891.
32.
LuszczynskaAScholzUSchwarzerR (2005) The General Self-Efficacy Scale: Multicultural validation studies. The Journal of Psychology139(5): 439–457.
33.
MarksR (2001) Efficacy theory and its utility in arthritis rehabilitation: Review and recommendations. Disability and Rehabilitation23(7): 271–280.
34.
ParkCLGaffeyAE (2007) Relationships between psychosocial factors and health behavior change in cancer survivors: An integrative review. Annals of Behavioral Medicine34(2): 115–134.
35.
PishghadamRBaghaeiPAli ShamsM. (2011) Construction and validation of a narrative intelligence scale with the Rasch rating scale model. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment8(1): 75–90.
36.
RaîcheG (2005) Critical Eigenvalue sizes in standardized residual principal components analysis. Rasch Measurement Transactions19(1): 1012.
37.
RaschG (1960) Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research.
38.
ScherbaumCACohen-CharashYKernMJ (2006) Measuring general self-efficacy: A comparison of three measures using item response theory. Educational and Psychological Measurement66: 1047–1063.
39.
ScholzUDoñaBGSudS. (2002) Is general self-efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment18(3): 242–251.
40.
SchwarzerR (2008) Modeling health behavior change: How to predict and modify the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Applied Psychology57: 1–29.
41.
SchwarzerRJerusalemM (1995) Generalized self-efficacy scale. In: WeinmanJWrightSJohnstonM (eds) Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio (Causal and Control Beliefs). Windsor: NER-NELSON, pp. 35–37.
42.
SchwarzerRJerusalemM (1999) Skalen zur Erfassung von Lehrer- und Schülermerkmalen: Dokumentation der psychometrischen Verfahren im Rahmen der Wissenschaftlichen Begleitung des Modellversuchs Selbstwirksame Schulen. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin.
43.
SchwarzerRBäßlerJKwiatekP. (1997) The assessment of optimistic self-beliefs: Comparison of the German, Spanish, and Chinese versions of the General Self-Efficacy Scale. Applied Psychology46(1): 69–88.
44.
SmithEVJr (2002) Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. Journal of Applied Measurement3: 205–231.
45.
TennantAPallantJF (2006) Unidimensionality matters! (A tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Measurement Transactions20: 1048–1051.
46.
TesioL (2003) Measuring behaviours and perceptions: Rasch analysis as a tool for rehabilitation research. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine35: 105–115.
47.
VianinM (2008) Psychometric properties and clinical usefulness of the Oswestry Disability Index. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine7: 161–163.
48.
WrightBD (1996) Local dependency, correlations and principal components. Rasch Measurement Transactions10(3): 509–511.
49.
WrightBDLinacreJM (1989) Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation70: 857–860.
