Validation of the Chinese Version of Underwood’s Daily Spiritual Experience Scale—Transcending Cultural Boundaries?
- 299 Downloads
Daily spiritual experience (DSE) refers to one’s interaction with the transcendent in day-to-day life. Underwood’s Daily Spiritual Experience Scale mic(DSES) was developed to measure this experiential component of religiousness and spirituality. Addressing ordinary daily experiences rather than particular beliefs, DSES has transcultural applicability potential.
The current study aimed to develop and evaluate the Chinese version of DSES (DSES-C).
The 16-item scale was translated faithfully through standard translation/back-translation procedures. The term “God” required an extended definition embracing both a humanized and a philosophical higher power in Chinese culture. The translated scale plus a battery of validation scales were administered to staff of a large rehabilitation service complex, resulting in 245 completed questionnaires.
Exploratory factor analysis revealed a similar factor structure as the original English version and similar problems with items 13 (compassion) and 14 (mercy). After carefully deliberating on the Chinese conceptualization of spirituality and balancing psychometric properties, the one-factor 16-item structure of the English version was supported. DSES-C showed high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97). Construct validity was supported by correlations with validation scales in expected directions.
The psychometric properties of DSES were similar to the English version in factor structure, internal consistency, and convergence/divergence construct validity.
KeywordsScale validation Spirituality Daily spiritual experience Chinese
This research was supported by grants from the Providence Garden for Rehab, the Sheng Kung Hui Diocesan Welfare Council. We would like to express our gratitude to the staff at the Providence Garden for Rehab for their help and collaboration, as well as their kind participation in this study. We would also like to thank Dr. Lynn G. Underwood for her permission and assistance in using the DSES in the study and Ryder Chan for his valuable statistical advice.
- 3.Weaver AJ, Koenig HG. Religion, spirituality, and their relevance to medicine: an update. Am Fam Phys. 2007;73(8):1336–7.Google Scholar
- 4.Koenig HK, McCullough ME, Larson DB. Handbook of religion and health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001.Google Scholar
- 5.McSherry W. Making sense of spirituality in nursing practice: an interactive approach. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.Google Scholar
- 6.Ng SM, Chan CLW. Social work intervention to embrace holistic well-being. In: Adams R, Dominelli L, Payne M, editors. Social work futures—crossing boundaries, transforming practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2005. p. 68–82.Google Scholar
- 8.Fetzer Institute, National Institute on Aging Working Group. Multidimensional measurement of religiousness, spirituality for use in health research. Kalamazoo, MI: Fetzer Institute; 1999.Google Scholar
- 10.Hood RW, Spilka B, Hunsberger B, Gorsuch R. The psychology of religion. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford; 1995.Google Scholar
- 26.Tower RB, Lobi PW. Love and longevity survey: measure descriptions and references. Unpublished manuscript. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University; 2004.Google Scholar
- 34.Kline P. A psychometrics primer. London: Free Association Books; 2000.Google Scholar
- 35.Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Factor analysis. In: Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC, editors. Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall International; 1998. p. 87–138.Google Scholar