Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T15:08:04.045Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Validity of the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales with family carers of older adults: confirmatory factor analyses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2020

Jenny Murfield Open the ORCID record for Jenny Murfield [Opens in a new window] ,
Wendy Moyle Open the ORCID record for Wendy Moyle [Opens in a new window] ,
Analise O’Donovan  and
Robert S. Ware
Jenny Murfield*
Affiliation:
Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Wendy Moyle
Affiliation:
Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Analise O’Donovan
Affiliation:
Griffith Health Group, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Robert S. Ware
Affiliation:
Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia School of Medicine, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Jenny Murfield, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Health Sciences (N48), 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Brisbane, Queensland 4111, Australia. Email: [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

Objectives:

To confirm the factor validity of the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales (CEAS), as set out in the original development study, when used with a sample of family carers of older adults.

Design:

A series of confirmatory factor analyses were undertaken to test the previously proposed factor solutions of each scale.

Setting:

As part of a larger cross-sectional survey, the scales were completed online or via hard copy between July and December 2019.

Participants:

An international sample of 171 family carers of adults aged 65 years or older.

Measurements:

The CEAS are three measures that individually assess Compassion for Self, Compassion to Others, and Compassion from Others. All scales measure two aspects, “engagement” and “actions” (two-factor solution), and Compassion for Self also measures two further dimensions within engagement: “sensitivity to suffering” and “engagement with suffering” (three-factor solution).

Results:

Results were largely consistent with the two-factor solutions proposed for the three orientations of compassion, with acceptable fit and good internal reliability. There was some support for the three-factor solution of Compassion for Self; however, despite model fit comparable to the two-factor solution, internal reliability of the delineated “engagement” dimensions was low, and there was a weak factor loading for item 5 that measured distress tolerance.

Conclusions:

Use of the CEAS with family carers of older adults is promising. Further research is recommended with larger samples and to explore distress tolerance as a competency within conceptualization and measurement of compassion.

Keywords

caringcompassionfactor analysisfamily caregiverpsychometrics
Type
Original Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 33 , Special Issue 4: Issue Theme: Caring for Caregivers of People with Dementia , April 2021 , pp. 373 - 383
Copyright
© International Psychogeriatric Association 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adelman, R. D., Tmanova, L. L., Delgado, D., Dion, S. and Lachs, M. S. (2014). Caregiver burden: a clinical review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 311, 1052–1060. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennett, D. A. (2001). How can I deal with missing data in my study? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 25, 464–469. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.2001.tb00294.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: Guilford Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carers UK. 2019. State of caring: a snapshot of unpaid care in the UK [Online]. Available at: http://www.carersuk.org/stateofcaring-report; last accessed 13 March 2020.Google Scholar
Collins, R. N., Gilligan, L. J. and Poz, R. (2018). The evaluation of a compassion-focused therapy group for couples experiencing a dementia diagnosis. Clinical Gerontologist, 41, 474–486. doi: 10.1080/07317115.2017.1397830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran, P. J., West, S. G. and Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16–29. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
del-Pino-Casado, R., Rodríguez Cardosa, M., López-Martínez, C. and Orgeta, V. (2019). The association between subjective caregiver burden and depressive symptoms in carers of older relatives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS ONE, 14, e0217648. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0217648.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilbert, P. (2014). The origins and nature of compassion focused therapy. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 53, 6–41. doi: 10.1111/bjc.12043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilbert, P. et al. (2017). The development of compassionate engagement and action scales for self and others. Journal of Compassionate Health Care, 4, 4. doi: 10.1186/s40639-017-0033-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goetz, J. L., Keltner, D. and Simon-Thomas, E. (2010). Compassion: an evolutionary analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 351–374. doi: 10.1037/a0018807.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gu, J., Baer, R., Cavanagh, K., Kuyken, W. and Strauss, C. (2019). Development and psychometric properties of the Sussex-Oxford Compassion Scales (SOCS). Assessment, 27, 3–20. doi: 10.1177/1073191119860911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gu, J., Cavanagh, K., Baer, R. and Strauss, C. (2017). An empirical examination of the factor structure of compassion. PLOS ONE, 12, e0172471. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hlabangana, V. and Hearn, J. H. (2019). Depression in partner caregivers of people with neurological conditions; associations with self-compassion and quality of life. Journal of Mental Health, 29, 176–181. doi: 10.1080/09638237.2019.1630724.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsieh, C. -C., Yu, C. -J., Chen, H. -J., Chen, Y. -W., Chang, N. -T. and Hsiao, F. -H. (2019). Dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and compassion from others as moderators between stress and depression in caregivers of patients with lung cancer. Psycho-Oncology, 28, 1498–1505. doi: 10.1002/pon.5106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hu, L. and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joreskog, K. and Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.Google Scholar
Kirby, J. N. and Gilbert, P. (2017). The emergence of the compassion focused therapies. In Gilbert, P. (Ed.), Compassion: Concepts, Research and Applications (pp. 258–285) London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, J. N., Tellegen, C. L. and Steindl, S. R. (2017). A meta-analysis of compassion-based interventions: current state of knowledge and future directions. Behavior Therapy, 48, 778–792. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2017.06.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Knight, B. G. and Sayegh, P. (2010). Cultural values and caregiving: the updated sociocultural stress and coping model. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65b, 5–13. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbp096.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lazarus, R. S. and Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer Publishing.Google Scholar
Lloyd, J., Muers, J., Patterson, T. G. and Marczak, M. (2019). Self-compassion, coping strategies, and caregiver burden in caregivers of people with dementia. Clinical Gerontologist, 42, 47–59. doi: 10.1080/07317115.2018.1461162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murfield, J., Moyle, W. and O’Donovan, A. (2019). Mindfulness- and compassion-based interventions for family carers of older adults: a scoping review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 103495. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naismith, I., Ripoll, K. and Pardo, V. M. (2020). Group compassion-based therapy for female survivors of intimate-partner violence and gender-based violence: a pilot study. Journal of Family Violence. doi: 10.1007/s10896-019-00127-2.Google Scholar
Pearlin, L. I., Mullan, J. T., Semple, S. J. and Skaff, M. M. (1990). Caregiving and the stress process: an overview of concepts and their measures. The Gerontologist, 30, 583–594. doi: 10.1093/geront/30.5.583.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulz, R. and Sherwood, P. R. (2008). Physical and mental health effects of family caregiving. American Journal of Nursing, 108, 23–27. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000336406.45248.4c.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, A. L., Teixeira, H. J., Teixeira, M. J. and Freitas, S. (2013). The needs of informal caregivers of elderly people living at home: an integrative review. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 27, 792–803. doi: 10.1111/scs.12019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steindl, S. R., Matos, M. and Creed, A. K. (2018). Early shame and safeness memories, and later depressive symptoms and safe affect: the mediating role of self-compassion. Current Psychology. doi: 10.1007/s12144-018-9990-8.Google Scholar
Steindl, S. R., Yiu, R. X. Q., Baumann, T. and Matos, M. (2019). Comparing compassion across cultures: similarities and differences among Australians and Singaporeans. Australian Psychologist. doi: 10.1111/ap.12433.Google Scholar
Strauss, C. et al. (2016). What is compassion and how can we measure it? A review of definitions and measures. Clinical Psychology Review, 47, 15–27. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2016.05.004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F. and Summers, G. F. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8, 84–136. doi: 10.2307/270754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, A. C. and Gallagher, S. (2019). Caregiving alters immunity and stress hormones: a review of recent research. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 28, 93–97. doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.02.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, H. (2010). Factor loadings. In Salkind, N. J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Zhang, X., Kuchinke, L., Woud, M. L., Velten, J. and Margraf, J. (2017). Survey method matters: Online/offline questionnaires and face-to-face or telephone interviews differ. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 172–180. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar