Free
Poster Session
Issue Date: August 2016
Published Online: August 01, 2016
Updated: January 01, 2021
Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Dispositional Flow Scale–2 and Flow Status Scale–2 for Persons With Schizophrenia
Author Affiliations
  • Taipei City Hospital–Yangming Branch
  • Winston-Salem State University
  • National Taiwan University
  • Taipei City Hospital–Songde Branch
  • Taipei City Hospital–Yangming Branch
  • Taipei City Hospital–Songde Branch
  • Taipei City Hospital–Yangming Branch
  • Taipei City Hospital–Songde Branch
  • Taipei City Hospital–Songde Branch
  • Taipei City Hospital–Songde Branch
Article Information
Mental Health / Assessment/Measurement
Poster Session   |   August 01, 2016
Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Dispositional Flow Scale–2 and Flow Status Scale–2 for Persons With Schizophrenia
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, August 2016, Vol. 70, 7011500033. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2016.70S1-PO4002
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, August 2016, Vol. 70, 7011500033. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2016.70S1-PO4002
Abstract

Date Presented 4/8/2016

The Chinese version of the Dispositional Flow Scale–2 (DFS–2) and Flow Status Scale–2 (FSS–2) showed adequate goodness of fit when administered to persons with schizophrenia in Taiwan, and future studies would be suggested to apply the same validation method for DFS–2 and FSS–2 in other cultures or populations.

Primary Author and Speaker: Lin-Jye Huang

Additional Authors and Speakers: Chinyu Wu, Fu-Chang Hu, Kuan-Yu Lai, Yi-Hong Yang, Shu-Chun Lee, Yung-Chun Fang, Su-Mei Chang, Chun-Yi Yu, Hsu-Chang Huang

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to apply confirmatory factor analysis to validate the Chinese version of Dispositional Flow Scale–2 (DFS–2) and Flow Status Scale–2 (FSS–2) for persons with schizophrenia.
RATIONALE: In occupational therapy (OT) practice, just-right challenge has been encouraged to help people obtain flow experience. According to flow theory, flow experience occurs while the individual perceives challenge that matches his or her ability in activities. Within flow state, the individuals would have clear goals and a full sense of control to their actions and thus produce positive emotions. However, the instruments for evaluating individuals’ dispositional flow tendency and the flow status while participating in activities have not been refined with confirmatory factor analysis to increase trustworthiness in mental health practice.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional design
PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 229 adults diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder from psychiatric outpatient clinics, day hospitals, and vocational rehabilitation programs in Taipei, Taiwan.
METHOD: Research instruments included the Chinese translated version of the DFS–2, FSS–2, General Causality Orientation Scale, Activity Participation and Restriction Questionnaire, Satisfaction With Life Scale, and Positive and Negative Symptom Scale.
ANALYSIS: Lisrel 9.2 was used to analyze data. Based on the suggestions of Kline (2011, p. 268), we first conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the sample covariance matrix using the principal-factor estimation method and the oblique promax rotation to explore the factor structures. Then, we took the final six-factor models from EFA, respectively, for DFS–2 and FSS–2 as the initial factor models for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the same sample covariance matrix to verify and refine the measurement structures.
To ensure the quality of analysis results, basic model-fitting techniques were applied in CFA. First, with the aid of substantive knowledge and insight, stepwise variable selection was performed by iterating the following two actions: (1) using Wald’s t test to drop an insignificant structural parameter and (2) using the Modification Index to add an additional meaningful structural parameter. Next, in addition to χ2 goodness-of-fit test, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and comparative fit index (CFI) were particularly examined for assessing the adequacy of fit.
RESULTS: The results showed that the DFS–2 had six first-order factors and one second-order factor, χ2(534) = 898.06, p = .000, RMSEA = 0.055, CFI = 0.987, and the FSS–2 had seven first-order factors and one second-order factor, χ2(498) = 809.14, p = .000, RMSEA = 0.052, CFI = 0.945.
DISCUSSION: Followed by the usual cutoff values for well-fitted factor models in CFA are RMSEA < 0.06, and CFI > 0.95 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998, p. 362), the Chinese version of DFS–2 and FSS–2 showed adequate goodness of fit when administered to persons with schizophrenia in Taiwan.
IMPACT STATEMENT: The implication of this study is that the Chinese version of the DFS–2 and FSS–2 may serve as useful tools in research and mental health practice, which help to establish the foundations for further inquiring OT intervention outcomes and cross-cultural differences.
References
Jackson, S. A., & Eklund, R. C. (2004). The flow scales manual. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.