Exact(1)
At this stage, the proposed instrument consisted of 56 items: demographics (4 items); perceived risk (8 items); life events and family history of the disease (8 items); perceived impact of carrying a mutation (9 items); family communication (6 items); disease-specific concerns (5 items); optimism (3 items); social support (3 items), premorbid functioning and previous psychiatric history (10 items).
Similar(59)
Moreover, the 4-item optimism questionnaire has not been validated yet and we relied on self-report measures rather than semi-structured psychiatric interviews for mental-wellbeing measures (except for the MMSE).
Given the similar reliability of the 6-item and the 3-item scales of the LOT-R in our study (α = .65 and.54 for the 6-item and 3-item optimism scales), and also in other studies, e.g., [ 30, 31], this difference is not expected to be due to a difference in measurement error.
The item about optimism was also the one that had the lowest loading study in the study in Northern Ireland [ 5].
The scale consists of six optimism items and four filler items measured on a 5-point Likert-scale, 'strongly disagree' =0, 'to strongly agree' =4.
Optimism was measured using the three optimism items from the Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R) [ 16 ].
Whether the full LOT-R or the subscale of 3 optimism items is used, about one-third of the variance is accounted for by additive genetic differences between individuals, while the remaining variance is accounted for by non-shared environmental influences.
Coping styles related to limitations included: optimism (five items), pacing (ten items), and creative solution seeking (eight items).
Fourth, this study includes only one item that measures optimism, that is, confidence in the future.
Consistent with the trust measure, each optimism item was scored on a 7-point scale from 1='definitely disagree' to 7='definitely agree'.
Based on the item loadings belonging to their respective constructs, a total of the loadings of 15 items (one item of optimism, one item of innovativeness, six items of insecurity, and seven items of discomfort) was lower than the cut-off value of 0.7 [ 77].
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com