اعتبارسنجی سه معیار سلامت روان مثبت در دانشجویان مهاجر و غیرمهاجر ایرانی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 Mental Health Research and Treatment Center, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany.

2 Mental Health Research and Treatment Center, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany. DZPG (German Center for Mental Health), Partner site Bochum/Marburg, Bochum, Germany.

3 Department of Counseling, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Iran.

4 Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran.

10.22038/JFMH.2025.83319.3178

چکیده

مقدمه: سلامت روان مثبت یک جزء حیاتی از رفاه عمومی است. هدف اصلی این مطالعه اعتبارسنجی سه معیار سلامت روان مثبت در بین دانشجویان مهاجر و غیرمهاجر ایرانی بود.
روش‌ کار: در این مطالعه که در ایران و آلمان انجام شد، از روش نمونه‌گیری در دسترس برای انتخاب دانشجویان مهاجر و غیرمهاجر ایرانی استفاده شد. شرکت‌کنندگان یک نظرسنجی آنلاین را تکمیل کردند که شامل سه معیار سلامت روان مثبت بود - مقیاس رضایت از زندگی (SWLS)، پرسشنامه حمایت اجتماعی (F-SozU K-14)، مقیاس تاب‌آوری (RS-11) و مقیاس افسردگی، اضطراب و استرس (DASS-21). تحلیل عاملی تأییدی (CFA) و تحلیل پایایی برای ارزیابی اعتبار و پایایی معیارها در این جمعیت انجام شد.
نتایج: در این مطالعه، ۵۸۴ دانشجوی غیرمهاجر ایرانی و ۱۸۶ دانشجوی مهاجر ایرانی شرکت کردند. یافته‌ها نشان داد که سازه‌های سلامت روان مثبت با DASS-21 همبستگی منفی و با یکدیگر همبستگی مثبت دارند. تحلیل عاملی تأییدی، کفایت مدل را تأیید کرد و تمام فرضیات لازم را برآورده ساخت. تحلیل‌های تغییرناپذیری اندازه‌گیری برای SWLS، F-SozU K-14 و RS-11 نشان‌دهنده برازش خوب مدل و سازگاری آن در هر دو گروه دانش‌آموزان مهاجر و غیرمهاجر بود.
نتیجه‌گیری: یافته‌های این مطالعه از اعتبار این سه معیار پشتیبانی می‌کند. محققان، مربیان و سیاست‌گذاران با استفاده از این ابزارهای معتبر، جنبه‌های کلیدی سلامت روان مثبت را در بین دانش‌آموزان مهاجر و غیرمهاجر ایرانی ارزیابی می‌کنند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

مراجع

  1. Bibi A, Lin M, Margraf J. Salutogenic constructs across Pakistan and Germany: A cross-sectional Study. Int J Clin Health Psychol 2020; 20(1): 1-9.
  2. Frazier T, Doyle Fosco SL. Nurturing positive mental health and wellbeing in educational settings–the PRICES model. Front Public Health 2024; 11: 1287532.
  3. Bi S, Stevens GW, Maes M, Boer M, Delaruelle K, Eriksson C, et al. Perceived social support from different sources and adolescent life satisfaction across 42 countries/regions: The moderating role of national-level generalized trust. J Youth Adolesc 2021; 50(7): 1384-409.
  4. King DD, Lyons B, Phetmisy CN. Perceived resiliency: The influence of resilience narratives on attribution processes in selection. Journal of vocational behavior 2021; 131: 103653.
  5. Liu Y, Yang X, Wu Y, Xu Y, Zhong Y, Yang S. The relationship between job satisfaction and depressive symptoms among Chinese adults aged 35-60 years: The mediating role of subjective well-being and life satisfaction. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2023; 20(3): 2023.
  6. Bibi A, Lin M, Brailovskaia J, Margraf J. Mental health of university students of Pakistan and Germany and the right to health care. International journal of human rights in health care 2023; 17(5): 1-14.
  7. Bieda A, Hirschfeld G, Schönfeld P, Brailovskaia J, Lin M, Margraf J. Happiness, life satisfaction, and positive mental health: Investigating reciprocal effects over four years in a Chinese student sample. J Res Pers 2019; 78: 198-209.
  8. Brailovskaia J, Lin M, Scholten S, Zhu M, Fu Y, Shao M, et al. A qualitative cross-cultural comparison of well-being constructs: The meaning of happiness, life satisfaction, and social support for German and Chinese students. J Happiness Stud 2022; 23:1-24.
  9. Whisman MA, Judd CM. A cross-national analysis of measurement invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Psychol Assess 2016; 28(2): 239-44.
  10. Galinha IC, Oishi S, Pereira C, Wirtz D. Personal values and life domain satisfaction predict global life satisfaction differently across cultures. J Soc Pers Relat 2023; 40(10): 3319-43.
  11. Jang S, Kim ES, Cao C, Allen TD, Cooper CL, Lapierre LM, et al. Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale across 26 countries. J Cross Cult Psychol 2017; 48(4): 560-76.
  12. Schnettler B, Miranda-Zapata E, Lobos G, del Carmen Lapo M, Adasme-Berríos C, Hueche C. Measurement invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Chilean and Ecuadorian older adults. Pers Individ Dif 2017; 110: 96-101.
  13. Tucker KL, Ozer DJ, Lyubomirsky S, Boehm JK. Testing for measurement invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale: A comparison of Russians and North Americans. Soc Indic Res 2006; 78: 341-60.
  14. Bayani AA, Koocheky AM, Goodarzi H. [The reliability and validity of the Satisfaction with Life Scale]. Journal of Iranian psychology 2008; 3(11): 259-65. (Persian)
  15. Laird KT, Krause B, Funes C, Lavretsky H. Psychobiological factors of resilience and depression in late life. Transl Psychiatry 2019; 9(1): 88.
  16. Siegmann P, Teismann T, Fritsch N, Forkmann T, Glaesmer H, Zhang XC, et al. Resilience to suicide ideation: A cross-cultural test of the buffering hypothesis. Clin Psychol Psychother 2018; 25(1): e1-9.
  17. Brailovskaia J, Schönfeld P, Zhang XC, Bieda A, Kochetkov Y, Margraf J. A cross-cultural study in Germany, Russia, and China: Are resilient and socially supported students protected against depression, Anxiety, and stress? Psychol Rep 2018; 121(2): 265-81.
  18. Brailovskaia J, Schönfeld P, Kochetkov Y, Margraf J. What does migration mean to us? USA and Russia: Relationship between migration, resilience, social support, happiness, life satisfaction, depression, anxiety, and stress. Curr Psychol 2019; 38(2): 421-31.
  19. Neneh BN. Entrepreneurial passion and entrepreneurial intention: the role of social support and entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Stud High Educ 2022; 47(3): 587-603.
  20. Mostert K, Pienaar J. The moderating effect of social support on the relationship between burnout, intention to drop out, and satisfaction with studies of first-year university students. Journal of psychology in Africa 2020; 30(3): 197-202.
  21. Ostafin BD, Proulx T. Meaning in life and resilience to stressors. Anxiety Stress Coping 2020; 33(6): 603-22.
  22. Schumacher J, Leppert K, Gunzelmann T, Strauß B, Brähler E. [Die Resilienzskala–ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung der psychischen Widerstandsfähigkeit als Personmerkmal]. Z Klin Psychol Psychiatr Psychother 2005; 53(1): 16-39. (German)
  23. Nishi D, Kawashima Y, Noguchi H, Usuki M, Yamashita A, Koido Y, et al. Resilience, post-traumatic growth, and work engagement among health-care professionals after the great east Japan earthquake: A 4-year prospective follow-up study. J Occup Health 2016; 58(4): 347-53.
  24. Bieda A, Hirschfeld G, Schönfeld P, Brailovskaia J, Zhang XC, Margraf J. Universal happiness? Cross-cultural measurement invariance of scales assessing positive mental health. Psychol Assess 2017; 29(4): 408-21.
  25. Glaesmer H, Grande G, Braehler E, Roth M. The German version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS). Eur J Psychol Assess 2011; 27(2): 127-32.
  26. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health 2005; 8(2): 94-104.
  27. Fydrich T, Sommer G, Tydecks S, Brähler E. [Fragebogen zur sozialen Unterstützung (F-SozU): Normierung der Kurzform (K-14)]. Z Med Psychol 2009; 18(1): 43-8.
  28. Lovibond PF, Lovibond SH. The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behav Res Ther 1995; 33(3): 335-43.
  29. Maroufizadeh S, Zareiyan A, Sigari N. Reliability and validity of the Persian version of Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) in adults with asthma. Arch Iran Med 2014; 17(5): 67-71.
  30. Hirschfeld G, Von Brachel R. Improving multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis in R-A tutorial in measurement invariance with continuous and ordinal indicators. Pract Assess Res Eval 2014; 19(7): 2946.
  31. Whittaker TA. Using the modification index and the standardized expected parameter change for model modification. J Exp Educ 2012; 80(1): 26-44.
  32. Kline RB. Assessing statistical aspects of test fairness with structural equation modelling. In: Fairness issues in educational assessment. New York: Routledge; 2018:116-134.
  33. Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ Res Methods 2000; 3(1): 4-70.
  34. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equ Modeling 2002; 9(2): 233-55.
  35. Byrne BM, Shavelson RJ, Muthén B. Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychol Bull 1989; 105(3): 456-66.
  36. Chou C-P, Bentler PM. Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. In: Hoyle RH. (editor). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. London: Sage; 1995: 37-55.
  37. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling 1999; 6(1): 1-55.
  38. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electron J Bus Res Methods 2008; 6(1): 53-60.
  39. West SG, Taylor AB, Wu W. Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. In: Hoyle RH. (editor). Handbook of structural equation modeling. New Jersey: Guilford; 2012: 209-31.
  40. Riordan CM, Vandenberg RJ. A central question in cross-cultural research: Do employees of different cultures equally interpret work-related measures? J Manage 1994; 20(3): 643-71.
مجله اصول بهداشت روانی
دوره 28، شماره 1
بهمن و اسفند 1405
صفحه 65-73

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار