Journal of Nursing & Patient CareISSN: 2573-4571

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Preliminary investigation of the affective domain questionnaire: Reliability & validity findings

Dale Hilty, Jody Gill Rocha, Kathryn Ross, Anne Hinze and Kali Clark

Mt. Carmel College of Nursing, USA

: J Nurs Patient Care


Abstract: Study 1: The participants were approximately 500 Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) students in an undergraduate program. Hypothesis 1: Using SPSS 25, the exploratory principal axis factor analysis (EPAFA) was used to determine if the ADQ multi-dimensional construct (i.e., two or more common factors). Hypothesis 2: Determine if the reliability estimate(s) would be greater than 80 for engagement common factors. Study 2: The participants (N=111) were senior level BSN students in an undergraduate program. Hypothesis 1: There would be a difference between the Hilty (2017) competitive greatness (high and moderate-low scoring groups) when compared to the ADQ common factors (SPSS 25, Independent t-test). Results: Study 1: Hypothesis 1: The EPAFA found three common factors accounting for 58% of the variance. The first factor combined the questions measuring the Krathwohl et al., (1964) theoretical categories of 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 3.1. The second factor groups the questions measuring the theoretical categories 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1, and 4.2. The third common factor assembled the questions measuring the 5.1 and 5.2 categories. Hypothesis 2: The coefficient alpha reliability estimates were greater than 0.80 (First Factor 895; Second Factor 931; Third Factor 896. Study 2: Hypothesis 1: The competitive greatness (CG) scale was used to divide the nursing student sample into two groups. The high scoring CG group (N=62) and the moderate-low scoring group (N=49) had comparable numbers of students. Independent t-test (N=111) analyses found significant differences between the two CG groups and the second factor (p=0.032) and the third factor (p=0.001). There was no significant difference between the two CG groups and the first factor (p=0.141).


Dale M Hilty, Associate Professor at the Mt. Carmel College of Nursing. He received his PhD in counseling psychology from the Department of Psychology at The Ohio State University. He has published studies in the areas of psychology, sociology and religion. between April 2017 and April 2018 and his ten research teams published 55 posters at local, state, regional, national and international nursing conferences.

Track Your Manuscript

Awards Nomination

Recommended Conferences

4th World Congress on Nursing Education & Management

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia