Investigating discrimination in the workplace
Standard
Investigating discrimination in the workplace : Translation and validation of the Everyday Discrimination Scale for nursing staff in Germany. / Ulusoy, Nazan; Nienhaus, Albert; Brzoska, Patrick.
In: BMC NURS, Vol. 22, No. 1, 196, 09.06.2023, p. 196.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Investigating discrimination in the workplace
T2 - Translation and validation of the Everyday Discrimination Scale for nursing staff in Germany
AU - Ulusoy, Nazan
AU - Nienhaus, Albert
AU - Brzoska, Patrick
PY - 2023/6/9
Y1 - 2023/6/9
N2 - BackgroundThe Everyday Discrimination Scale (EDS) is a frequently used questionnaire in the field of health and social psychology that aims to explore perceptions of discrimination, especially instances of injustice related to various diversity characteristics. No adaptation to health care staff exists. The present study translates and adapts the EDS to nursing staff in Germany and examines its reliability and factorial validity as well as its measurement equivalence between men and women and different age groups.MethodsThe study was based on an online survey conducted among health care staff of two hospitals and two inpatient care facilities in Germany. The EDS was translated using a forward-backward translation approach. Direct maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the factorial validity of the adapted EDS. Differential item functioning (DIF) related to age and sex was investigated by means of multiple indicators, multiple causes (MIMIC) models.ResultsData on 302 individuals was available, of whom 237 (78.5%) were women. The most commonly employed one-factor, 8-item baseline model of the adapted EDS showed a poor fit (RMSEA = 0.149; CFI = 0.812; TLI = 0.737; SRMR = 0.072). The model fit improved considerably after including three error covariances between items 1 and 2, items 4 and 5, and items 7 and 8 (RMSEA = 0.066; CFI = 0.969; TLI = 0.949; SRMR = 0.036). Item 4 showed DIF related to sex and age, item 6 showed DIF related to age. DIF was moderate in size and did not bias the comparison between men and women or between younger and older employees.ConclusionsThe EDS can be considered a valid instrument for the assessment of discrimination experiences among nursing staff. Given that the questionnaire, similar to other EDS adaptations, may be prone to DIF and also considering that some error covariances need to be parameterized, latent variable modelling should be used for the analysis of the questionnaire.
AB - BackgroundThe Everyday Discrimination Scale (EDS) is a frequently used questionnaire in the field of health and social psychology that aims to explore perceptions of discrimination, especially instances of injustice related to various diversity characteristics. No adaptation to health care staff exists. The present study translates and adapts the EDS to nursing staff in Germany and examines its reliability and factorial validity as well as its measurement equivalence between men and women and different age groups.MethodsThe study was based on an online survey conducted among health care staff of two hospitals and two inpatient care facilities in Germany. The EDS was translated using a forward-backward translation approach. Direct maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the factorial validity of the adapted EDS. Differential item functioning (DIF) related to age and sex was investigated by means of multiple indicators, multiple causes (MIMIC) models.ResultsData on 302 individuals was available, of whom 237 (78.5%) were women. The most commonly employed one-factor, 8-item baseline model of the adapted EDS showed a poor fit (RMSEA = 0.149; CFI = 0.812; TLI = 0.737; SRMR = 0.072). The model fit improved considerably after including three error covariances between items 1 and 2, items 4 and 5, and items 7 and 8 (RMSEA = 0.066; CFI = 0.969; TLI = 0.949; SRMR = 0.036). Item 4 showed DIF related to sex and age, item 6 showed DIF related to age. DIF was moderate in size and did not bias the comparison between men and women or between younger and older employees.ConclusionsThe EDS can be considered a valid instrument for the assessment of discrimination experiences among nursing staff. Given that the questionnaire, similar to other EDS adaptations, may be prone to DIF and also considering that some error covariances need to be parameterized, latent variable modelling should be used for the analysis of the questionnaire.
U2 - 10.1186/s12912-023-01367-w
DO - 10.1186/s12912-023-01367-w
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 37291521
VL - 22
SP - 196
JO - BMC NURS
JF - BMC NURS
SN - 1472-6955
IS - 1
M1 - 196
ER -