Translation and validation in Brazilian Portuguese of the reactions to homosexuality scale.
Translation and validation in Brazilian Portuguese of the reactions to homosexuality scale.
复制标题
对同性恋反应量表的巴西葡萄牙语翻译和验证。
DOI：
10.1080/13548506.2021.1936580
复制
发表时间：
2021
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Thombs,BrettD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Torres,ThiagoS;Luz,PaulaM;Bezerra,DanielRB;Almeida-Brasil,CellineC;Marins,LuanaMS;Veloso,ValdileaG;Grinsztejn,Beatriz;Harel,Daphna;Thombs,BrettD
内化的同性性源于接受对自己的同性取向的负面态度，这对男同性恋者、双性恋者和其他男男性行为者(GBM)的健康有负面影响。我们将同性恋反应量表(RHS)翻译成巴西葡萄牙语，并对其因素结构、效度和信度进行了评估。第一步包括翻译、回译、评估、同行评审和量表的预试。然后，我们在2019年10月和2020年2月至3月分别通过Grindr和Hornet上的广告在网上招募的两个便利样本中试行了该量表。将最大样本随机分为两组进行探索性因素分析(EFA)和验证性因素分析(CFA)。标准效度和结构效度通过量表得分和研究变量之间的相关性来评估。共有5573名GBM(样本1：218名；样本2：5355名)完成了RHS。全民教育(N=2652)产生了两个大于一的特征值(因子1：3.5和因子2：1.1)。单因素解决方案基于对平面图和项目因素加载的检查提供了最具解释力的模型(χ2(14)=0.1373.1，p<；0.001；CFI=0.89；TLI=0.84；RMSEA=0.19；SRMS=0.09)。虽然单因素回归分析显示了中等的拟合度，但根据项目内容和解释，误差项可以互不相同，显著改善了模型拟合度(χ2(12)=0.309.1，p<；10.001；CFI=0.97；TLI=90.96；RMSEA=10.09；SRMR=0.02)。根据假设，没有自我认同为同性恋的男性(平均得分17.9，而自我认同为同性恋的男性：11.8)和在过去6个月内报告没有与男性发生性关系的男性(平均得分12.6，与报告与男性发生性关系的男性：10.6)得分更高，反映了更高的内在同负性。巴西葡萄牙语有效地翻译和验证了RHS，可以用来评估内在化同负性对GBM健康的作用，以及它对艾滋病毒预防技术采用的影响。
Internalized homonegativity results from the acceptance of negative attitudes about one’s same-sex orientation, which has negative consequences for the health of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM). We translated the 7-item Reactions to Homosexuality Scale (RHS) to Brazilian Portuguese and assessed its factor structure, validity and reliability. The first step included the translation, back-translation, evaluation, peer review, and pre-testing of the scale. Then, we piloted the scale in two convenience samples of adult Brazilians recruited online during October 2019 and February to March 2020 through advertisements on Grindr and Hornet, respectively. The largest sample was randomly split into two groups for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) then confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Criterion and construct validity were assessed via correlations between scale scores and study variables. A total of 5573 GBM (sample 1: 218; sample 2: 5355) completed the RHS. EFA (N = 2652) yielded two eigenvalues greater than one (Factor 1: 3.5 and Factor 2: 1.1). A one-factor solution provided the most interpretable model based on examination of scree plot and item factor loadings (χ2(14) = 1373.1, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.89; TLI = 0.84; RMSEA = 0.19; SRMS = 0.09). Though one-factor CFA showed moderate fit, freeing errors terms to covary, based on item content and interpretation, significantly improved model fit (χ2(12) = 309.1, p < .001; CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.09; SRMR = 0.02). As hypothesized, men who did not self-identify as gay (mean score 17.9 compared to those self-identifying as gay: 11.8) and men who reported no sex with men in the past 6 months (mean score 12.6 compared to those who reported sex with men: 10.6) scored higher reflecting higher internalized homonegativity. The RHS was effectively translated and validated in Brazilian Portuguese and can be used to evaluate the role of internalized homonegativity on GBM’s health, as well as its impact on the uptake of HIV prevention technologies.