Perceptions of Peer Helping Scale (Edwards et al., 2017)
- Populations: Adolescents, Young Adults
- Age ranges: 13-19
- Languages: English
- Countries: United States
Items
Items taken from Factor Loading reporting table and may not be exact to final instrument
- Students at my school know a lot about SA & relationship abuse
- It’s important to students to stop relationship abuse & SA
- Students at my school think it’s important to help
Responses
Items used a 4 point Likert-type scale, 1 = disagree strongly, 4 = agree strongly
Scoring
Not Reported
Citations
Edwards, K. M., Banyard, V. L., Sessarego, S. N., Stanley, L. R., Mitchell, K. J., Eckstein, R. P., Rodenhizer, K. A. E., & Leyva, P. C. (2018). Measurement tools to assess relationship abuse and sexual assault prevention program effectiveness among youth. Psychology of Violence, 8(5), 537–545. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000151
Scoring breakdown
Measure development
- Significant design input from young people
- Cognitive interviews with young people
- Expert input
Validity
- Green: Face validity
- Unknown: Convergent validity
- Unknown: Construct validity
Reliability
- Red: Internal consistency
- Unknown: Test-retest
Ease of use
- Unknown: Readability
Definitions
Face validity: How well a measure appears to represent the construct it is supposed to be measuring.
Convergent validity: How well a measure correlates with other hypothetically-related measures.
Construct validity: The extent to which a measure reflects the construct it was designed to evaluate.
Internal consistency: The extent to which items in a scale capture aspects of the same construct.
Test-retest: The degree to which measurement scores are consistent over a short period of time (usually 2 weeks).
Readability: The ease with which a reader can understand the questionnaire items.
Key
- Green: Meets validation criteria
- Red: Does not meet validation criteria
- Unknown: Evidence not available
