Premium
Developing a valid and reliable self‐efficacy in clinical performance scale
Author(s) -
Cheraghi F.,
Hassani P.,
Yaghmaei F.,
AlaviMajed H.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
international nursing review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.84
H-Index - 51
eISSN - 1466-7657
pISSN - 0020-8132
DOI - 10.1111/j.1466-7657.2008.00685.x
Subject(s) - cronbach's alpha , content validity , reliability (semiconductor) , construct validity , likert scale , scale (ratio) , psychology , nursing , concurrent validity , self efficacy , test (biology) , validity , nurse education , applied psychology , clinical psychology , psychometrics , medicine , internal consistency , social psychology , developmental psychology , power (physics) , physics , paleontology , quantum mechanics , biology
Aim: This paper describes the development and testing of the Self‐Efficacy in Clinical Performance (SECP) instrument for nursing students. Background: Accurate measurement of self‐efficacy can be used to predict nursing students' clinical performance. The literature review indicated there is no existing self‐efficacy in clinical performance instrument for Iranian nursing students. Methods: To clarify the concept of self‐efficacy in clinical performance, 28 semi‐structured interviews and three focus groups were conducted. A self‐efficacy framework with well‐developed theoretical constructs was formed. A review of literature and content analysis of the interview transcripts identified subscales and items to be included in the instrument. Then, a methodological design was used. The SECP was developed into 69 Likert‐format items, which were evaluated by 20 nursing experts in the form of content validity index. The scale's validity and reliability were tested in a randomized sample of 207 final year nursing students. Findings: The final scale consists of four dimensions with 37 items. The overall scale internal reliability had α = 0.96; the dimensions Cronbach's α ranged from 0.90 to 0.92. Test–retest reliability with a 2‐week time interval was: r = 0.94. In addition, concurrent validity was obtained ( r = 0.73, P = 0.01). Conclusions: The SECP has demonstrated evidence of content validity, construct validity, concurrent validity, internal consistency reliability and stability. Statistical analysis provided an objective tool for assessing nursing students' self‐efficacy in clinical performance. It may have been fruitful to further test the instrument with students from other years of their education.