Jump to content

User:Scarpy/Recovery Attitudes Questionnaire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Scarpy (talk | contribs) at 17:00, 17 August 2008 ( Created page with 'Recovery Attitudes Questionnaire-/'. The Recovery Attitudes Questionnaire has seven items measured on a five-point Likert Scale ranging from Strongly Agree to Stro...'). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Recovery Attitudes Questionnaire-/'. The Recovery Attitudes Questionnaire has seven items measured on a five-point Likert Scale ranging from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree (Borkin et al., 2000). The scale is designed to measure two factors related to recovery: 1) recovery is possible and; 2) recovery is difficult and it differs among people. Test re-test reliability, internal consistency and factorial validity were established after administering the instrument to 868 individuals with serious mental illness, providers of mental health services and the general public (Borkin et al., 2000). The authors began with a 21-item scale that demonstrated an acceptable level of internal consistency (.84 coefficient alpha). Moderate item-to-item correlations were found (.34 to .58), suggesting good independence of items. However, a series of factor analyses were conducted and the result was a two-factor solution having 7 items (the RAQ-7).

This solution was retained for parsimony. The two factors tap dimensions related to the fact that recovery requires faith and secondly that the paths to recovery are varied. The internal consistency of the two subscales and the total score were, respectively: .66, .64 and .70. Test re-test reliability with another sample of 85 individuals provided evidence ofstability ofthe scale, with a .67 coefficient for an average of 19 days between administrations. Known groups validity suggested, as might be expected, a significant difference among the respondent groups in their attitudes toward recovery, with mental health professionals having the most positive attitudes. Concurrent validity was suggested by analyses indicating that suggesting more positive attitudes among those who stated they were in recovery (Borkin et al., 2000).