Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The factor structure of the 30-item Domain Specific Risk Taking Attitude (DOSPERT) scale (Blais & Weber, 2006) was examined with a convenience sample of 205 Chinese undergraduate students from Macao. A comparison of five competing models via confirmatory factor analysis yielded empirical support for the perspective that risk-taking attitude was content-dependent. After removing the items in the Financial subscale of the DOSPERT scale and some post hoc modifications, a reasonably good fit to the four-correlated-factor model was achieved, in concordance with the theoretical framework. However, items in some scales needed further revision to purify their factor structure so that the DOSPERT scale would be a more psychometrically sound measure for investigating one's risk-taking attitudes in different life domains.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blais

A. R.

Weber

E. U.

(2006) A domain-specific risk-taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations. Judgment and Decision Making, 1, 33–47.

Blais

A. R.

Weber

E. U.

(2009) The Domain-Specific Risk Taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations: item selection and preliminary psychometric properties. Toronto, Canada: Defence R & D.

Blunch

N. J.

(2013) Introduction to structural equation modeling using IBM SPSS statistics and AMOS. (2nd ed.) London, UK: Sage.

Bray

Koo

(1999) Education and society in Hong Kong and Macao. Hong Kong, China: Kluwer Academic.

Byrne

B. M.

(2010) Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. (2nd ed.) New York: Routledge.

Brislin

(1980) Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In Triandis

H. C.

Berry

J. W.

(Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: methodology. Vol. 2. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Pp. 389–444.

Butler

Rosman

Seleski

Garcia

Lee

(2012) A medical risk attitude subscale for DOSPERT. Judgment and Decision Making, 7, 189–195.

Clark

L. A.

Watson

(1995) Constructing validity: basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319.

George

Mallery

(2013) SPSS for Windows step by step: a simple guide and reference. (13th ed.) Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson.

10.

Harrison

J. D.

Young

J. M.

Butow

Salkeld

Solomon

M. J.

(2005) Is it worth the risk? A systematic review of instruments that measure risk propensity for use in the health setting. Social Science and Medicine, 60, 1385–1396.

11.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structural equation analysis: conventional criteria vs new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

12.

X. X.

Xie

X. F.

(2012) Validation of the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale in Chinese college students. Judgment and Decision Making, 7, 181–188.

13.

Joreskog

K. G.

Sorbom

(2002) LISREL (version 8.52). [Computer software] Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.

14.

Mishra

Lalumiere

M. L.

(2011) Individual differences in risk-propensity: associations between personality and behavioral measures of risk. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 869–873.

15.

Reise

S. P.

Moore

T. M.

Haviland

M. G.

(2010) Bifactor models and rotations: exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544–559.

16.

Reise

S. P.

Morizot

Hays

R. D.

(2007) The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research, 16, 19–31.

17.

Weber

E. U.

Blais

A. R.

Betz

N. E.

(2002) A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 263–290.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Dospert Scale with Chinese University Students

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References