Calibration of the food parenting practice (FPP) item bank: tools for improving the measurement of food parenting practi
- PDF / 996,667 Bytes
- 16 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 18 Downloads / 163 Views
METHODOLOGY
Open Access
Calibration of the food parenting practice (FPP) item bank: tools for improving the measurement of food parenting practices of parents of 5–12-year-old children Louise C. Mâsse1* , Teresia M. O’Connor2, Yingyi Lin1, Sheryl O. Hughes2, Claire N. Tugault-Lafleur1, Tom Baranowski2 and Mark R. Beauchamp3
Abstract Purpose: There has been a call to improve measurement rigour and standardization of food parenting practices measures, as well as aligning the measurement of food parenting practices with the parenting literature. Drawing from an expert-informed conceptual framework assessing three key domains of food parenting practices (autonomy promotion, control, and structure), this study combined factor analytic methods with Item Response Modeling (IRM) methodology to psychometrically validate responses to the Food Parenting Practice item bank. Methods: A sample of 799 Canadian parents of 5–12-year-old children completed the Food Parenting Practice item bank (129 items measuring 17 constructs). The factorial structure of the responses to the item bank was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), confirmatory bi-factor item analysis, and IRM. Following these analyses, differential Item Functioning (DIF) and Differential Response Functioning (DRF) analyses were then used to test invariance properties by parents’ sex, income and ethnicity. Finally, the efficiency of the item bank was examined using computerized adaptive testing simulations to identify the items to include in a short form. Results: Overall, the expert-informed conceptual framework was predominantly supported by the CFA as it retained the same 17 constructs included in the conceptual framework with the exception of the access/availability and permissive constructs which were respectively renamed covert control and accommodating the child to better reflect the content of the final solution. The bi-factor item analyses and IRM analyses revealed that the solution could be simplified to 11 unidimensional constructs and the full item bank included 86-items (empirical reliability from 0.78 to 0.96, except for 1 construct) and the short form had 48 items. (Continued on next page)
* Correspondence: [email protected] 1 BC Children’s Hospital Research Institute, School of Population and Public Health University of British Columbia, F508-4490 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3V4, Canada Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the
Data Loading...
