↓ Skip to main content

The images of psychiatry scale: development, factor structure, and reliability

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The images of psychiatry scale: development, factor structure, and reliability
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12888-014-0337-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heather Stuart, Norman Sartorius, Tiina Liinamaa, The Images Study Group

Abstract

This analysis is based on a survey questionnaire designed to describe medical educators' views of psychiatry and psychiatrists. Our goals in this paper were to assess the psychometric properties of the survey questions by (a) using exploratory factor analysis to identify the basic factor structure underlying 37 survey items; (b) testing the resulting factor structure using confirmatory factor analysis; and (c) assessing the internal reliability of each identified factor. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to use these techniques to psychometrically assess a scale measuring the strength of stigma that medical educators attached to psychiatry. Survey data were collected from a random sample of 1,059 teaching faculty in 23 academic teaching sites in 15 countries. We conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to identify the scale structure and Cronbach's alpha to assess internal consistency of the resulting scales. Results showed that a two-factor solution was the best fit for the data. Following exploratory factor analysis, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis on a split half of the sample. Results highlighted several items with low loadings. Excluding factors with low correlations and allowing for several correlated variances resulted in a good fitting model explaining 95% of the variance in the data. We identified two unidimensional scales. The Images Scale contained 11 items measuring stereotypic content concerning psychiatry and psychiatrists. The Efficacy of Psychiatry Scale contained 5 items addressing perceptions of the challenges and effectiveness of psychiatry as a discipline.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 2 5%
Russia 1 2%
Poland 1 2%
Saudi Arabia 1 2%
Unknown 39 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Master 5 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 14 32%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Psychology 5 11%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 10 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 October 2020.
All research outputs
#14,792,181
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,186
of 4,679 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,028
of 361,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#52
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,679 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.