_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Report Information from ProQuest
June 14 2014 03:55
_______________________________________________________________

14 June 2014 ProQuest
Table of contents
1. Psychometric Properties of Spanish Versions of the FACES II and Dyadic Adjustment Scale................... 1
14 June 2014 ii ProQuest
Document 1 of 1

Psychometric Properties of Spanish Versions of the FACES II and Dyadic Adjustment Scale
Author: Youngblut, JoAnne M; Brooten, Dorothy; Menzies, Victoria

ProQuest document link
Abstract: Although Hispanic Americans are one of the fastest growing ethnic populations in the United States,
use and psychometric testing of Spanish versions of two instruments commonly used to measure quality of the
couple's relationship and family functioning, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) and the FACES II, have not
been reported. The purpose of this study was to test the psychometric properties of the newly translated
Spanish version of these two instruments. In this bilingual sample of 78 adults, internal consistencies were
acceptable (.72 to .77 for the FACES II; .67 to .93 for the DAS) and test-retest correlations were high (.80 to .88
FACES II; .79 to .87 DAS). Correlations between the Spanish and English versions were also high (.87 to .94
FACES II; .91 to .99 DAS). Psychometric findings support the reliability and validity of the Spanish versions of
these newly translated measures.
Full text: Headnote
Although Hispanic Americans are one of the fastest growing ethnic populations in the United States, use and
psychometric testing of Spanish versions of two instruments commonly used to measure quality of the couple's
relationship and family functioning, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) and the FACES II, have not been
reported. The purpose of this study was to test the psychometric properties of the newly translated Spanish
version of these two instruments. In this bilingual sample of 78 adults, internal consistencies were acceptable
(.72 to .77 for the FACES II; .67 to .93 for the DAS) and test-retest correlations were high (.80 to .88 FACES II;
.79 to .87 DAS). Correlations between the Spanish and English versions were also high (.87 to .94 FACES II;
.91 to .99 DAS). Psychometric findings support the reliability and validity of the Spanish versions of these newly
translated measures.
Keywords: Dyadic Adjustment Scale; FACES II scale; family functioning; Spanish; reliability; validity
Hispanic Americans are one of the fastest growing ethnic populations in the United States. In 2000, 35.2 million
Hispanics accounted for 12.5% of the U.S. population, a 61% increase from the 21.9 million Hispanics in the
United States in 1990 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2004). In some areas of the nation, such as in Miami-Dade County,
they are the majority population at 57% (Florida Department of Health, 2005). Despite their growing numbers,
Hispanic Americans are often underrepresented in health care research due to insufficient numbers of Hispanic
American researchers, study teams without Spanish-speaking members, and a lack of Spanish-language
instruments (Lange, 2002).
In recent years, the demand for valid research instruments in Spanish has grown (Bowden &Fox-Rushby, 2003;
Gonzalez-Gordon, Salvador-Carulla, Romero, Gonzalez- Saiz, &Romero, 2002; Perczek, Carver, Price, &Pozo-
Kaderman, 2000; Rivas-Vazquez et al., 2001). Researchers have the choice of developing a new instrument or
translating and adapting an existing one originally developed in another language such as English. Challenges
in the development, translation, and adaptation of instruments from one culture or language to another include
attaining cultural relevance and cultural equivalence in standard instruments as well as assessing
generalizability of the measures (Alegria et al., 2004).
In family studies, two common concepts frequently measured are quality of the couple's relationship and
functioning of the family. Two widely used instruments for these concepts are the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and
the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES II); however, use and psychometric testing of
Spanish versions of these instruments have not been reported. The purpose of this study was to test the
psychometric properties of the newly translated Spanish version of these two family instruments.
BACKGROUND
14 June 2014 Page 1 of 7 ProQuest
The Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS)
The Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) was developed to measure "the quality of marriage and other similar
dyads," including cohabiting couples who are not married (Spanier, 1976, p. 15). Spanier viewed dyadic
adjustment as a process but constructed the DAS to measure that process at a given point in time. He
developed the DAS through review of existing marital adjustment scale items, examination of content validity of
items by a panel of experts, and testing of the remaining 200 items in a purposive sample of 218 married and 94
divorced adults (White) in Pennsylvania. Frequency distributions were used to eliminate items with low variance
and high skewness. Eight additional items were eliminated due to factor loadings less than .30, indicating these
items shared little variance with the other items.
The resulting 32-item DAS contains four subscales. The Dyadic Consensus subscale measures agreement on
important matters. The Dyadic Satisfaction subscale measures the individual's satisfaction with their dyadic
relationship. The Dyadic Cohesion subscale measures the degree of closeness in the couple. The Affectional
Expression subscale measures the amount of physical demonstrations of affection. The DAS items are rated by
respondents on a Likert-type scale. Summative scores range from 0 to 151, with higher scores indicating more
favorable couple relationships.
Spanier's original testing (1976) supported the construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the DAS
total scale and its subscales. Subsequent testing by Heyman, Sayers, and Bellack (1994), in a sample of 140
couples, compared the DAS to the Quality of Marriage Index (Norton, 1983) and the Relationship Satisfaction
Questionnaire (Burns &Sayers, 1992). The measures showed excellent convergent validity (high correlations
among each other and with other measures of marital functioning, r = .8 to .90) and discriminant validity (low or
nonsignificant correlations with psychopathology subscales). Data on race or ethnicity of the sample participants
were not reported. In the study by Kimmel et al. (2000) of 174 adults (90.8% African American) with end-stage
renal disease, participants with dyadic conflict scores greater than one standard deviation above the mean had
a 46% increase in mortality risk. In addition, scores on the DAS Satisfaction subscale were significantly and
positively correlated with scores on the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (Zimet, Dahlem,
&Zimet, 1988), indicating that adults who perceived more social support also reported greater dyadic
satisfaction. Spanier (1976) reported high reliabilities for the DAS total scale (.96) and its four subscales: .90 for
Dyadic Consensus, .94 for Dyadic Satisfaction, .86 for Dyadic Cohesion, and .73 for Affectional Expression.
Carey, Spector, Lantinga, and Krauss (1993) report strong test-retest reliabilities (r = .73 to .84 for subscales
and .87 for total scale). Taken together, these findings support the DAS's reliability and construct validity in
Whites and African Americans.
The Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale (FACES)
Development of the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale, known as the FACES, was based on
the Circumplex model of family functioning. The FACES measures the model's two major concepts: family
adaptability and family cohesion (Olson, Sprenkle, &Russell, 1979). Based on the Circumplex model, families
scoring in the midrange on both cohesion and adaptability, defined with cut points based on family constellation,
are considered "balanced" family types. Families scoring below or above the midrange on both cohesion and
adaptability are considered "extreme" family types. Olson et al. (1979) posited a curvilinear relationship of
cohesion and adaptability to family functioning, with the "ideal" position on adaptability and cohesion near the
midpoints of the scales. Although this relationship holds in "problem" families, a linear relationship has been
found in "normal" families (Olson, 1989). There have been three versions of the FACES. The 20-item FACES
III, a subset of the 30 items in the FACES II, was expected to be better because of its shorter length and lower
correlation between cohesion and adaptability. Its internal consistency (cohesion = .77, adaptability = .62),
however, has been lower than that of the FACES II (cohesion = .86 to .88, adaptability = .78 to .79) (Olson et
al., 1989).
The FACES II, which was used this study, (Olson, Portner, &Bell, 1983), has two subscales: family cohesion (15
14 June 2014 Page 2 of 7 ProQuest
items) and family adaptability (15 items). Respondents rate each of the items on a 5-point scale from 1 "almost
never" to 5 "almost always," and the ratings are summed to obtain scale scores. Validity of the scales is
supported by the significant correlations of family cohesion and family adaptability with the Feetham Family
Functioning Survey (a discrepancy score), r = -.56, -.53; the Family APGAR, r = .56, .48; the Family Satisfaction
Scale, r = .62, .61; and the Family Function Index, r = .63, .54 (Thomas &Barnard, 1986). Olson et al. (1983)
report internal consistencies of .91 and .80 and test-retest correlations of .83 and .80 for FACES II cohesion and
adaptability, respectively.
Validity of the FACES II has been supported further by Olson (1989) and others (Clarke, 1984; Youngblut
&Brooten, 2006), including studies with African American samples (Compton, Thompson, &Kaslow, 2005;
Harris &Molock, 2000). In his study of 50 clients diagnosed with either schizophrenia (n = 25) or anxiety
disorder (n = 25) and 78 "normal" individuals with no psychiatric diagnoses, Clarke found that the clinical
respondents were significantly more likely than the normal respondents to rate their families of origin as
"extreme" based on the items in the FACES II. Families of origin for 64% of anxiety disorder clients and 56% of
schizophrenic clients, but only 7% of "normal" respondents, were classified as "extreme." In contrast, families of
origin for 48% of "normal" respondents, but only 8% of anxiety disorder clients and 12% of schizophrenic
clients, were classified as "balanced." In their study of 200 low-income African American men and women,
Compton et al. (2005) found that lower levels of family cohesion and adaptability were associated with a greater
relative rate of suicide attempt. In a sample of 188 African American undergraduate students, Harris and Molock
(2000) found a positive correlation between family cohesion and family support. Less depression and suicidal
ideation were related to greater family cohesion and family support. In their recent study of 134 parents (33%
Black, 18% Hispanic) of preschool children hospitalized for head trauma, Youngblut and Brooten (2006) found
that greater family cohesion and adaptability at 3 months postdischarge were related to greater social support.
In addition, greater psychological well-being during the child's hospitalization was related to greater family
cohesion and adaptability at 3 months postdischarge. Taken together, these findings support the construct
validity of the FACES II.
METHOD
Sample
The convenience sample consisted of 78 adults (ages 19-66) who could read both English and Spanish and
were married or living with a romantic partner. Participants' spouses or partners were excluded from the
sample. Half (n = 39) of the respondents were recruited through personal contacts with staff and students on a
university campus. These respondents were asked to complete the questionnaire at Time 1 only. The other 39
respondents were recruited from personal contacts outside the university. These 39 respondents from outside
the university were asked to complete the questionnaire twice at an interval of 2 weeks (Time 1 and Time 2).
Mean age of the full sample was 38.3 (SD = 8.84). Most of the participants were Hispanic (69%), employed
(96.2%), and had completed at least a bachelor's degree (70.5%). Most spoke English at work (85.9%). About
half spoke Spanish at home (55.1%) and with friends (53.8%) and thought in Spanish (48.7%). Compared to the
Time 1 only group (Table 1), the test-retest group was more likely to be Hispanic, had less education, and had
lived with their spouses/partners longer. In addition, the test-retest group was more likely to use English at work,
at home, and with friends and to think in English.
Measures
The 32-item Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS; Spanier, 1976) and the FACES II were administered to
respondents along with a measure of Happiness With Spouse and Family. When completing the Happiness
With Spouse and Family items, participants responded on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 "very unhappy" to 6
"very happy" to two separate questions: "All things considered, how happy are you in your relationship with your
spouse/partner?" and "All things considered, how happy are you with your family?"
Procedure
14 June 2014 Page 3 of 7 ProQuest
The FACES II and the DAS were translated into Spanish by one native Spanish speaker (born, raised, and
educated in Puerto Rico) and translated back into English by another native Spanish speaker (first-generation
Cuban American raised in southern Florida) who had not seen the original English version. These two
translators and the investigators compared the two English versions for equivalence in meaning. Where
discrepancies occurred, the two native Spanish speakers and the investigators discussed the meaning of the
original English item. The two native Spanish speakers then agreed on Spanish wording that most closely
represented the meaning of the English item. None of the items were considered irrelevant by the native
Spanish speakers.
Participants completed the FACES II and the DAS first in Spanish then in English. The two single-item
indicators that asked how happy the respondents were with their families and their partners and the
demographic questions were presented to respondents before the FACES II and the DAS and were completed
in English. About 2 weeks later, 39 participants completed the study questionnaire a second time. Data were
collected from individuals in a setting of their choice, generally at the university or in their homes. Reliability of
the Spanish version was assessed with coefficient alpha for internal consistency and Pearson product moment
correlations between the first and second surveys for stability (test-retest reliability). Validity was examined by
comparing scores for the English and Spanish versions with paired t tests and with correlations between the
English and Spanish subscales. In addition, correlations were used to test the relationships between the two
single-item indicators and the Spanish FACES II and DAS subscales.
RESULTS
Reliability
Internal consistency reliabilities were good for all of the subscales of the FACES II and the DAS in both English
and Spanish (Table 2). Test-retest correlations between the English versions at both time points and the
Spanish versions at both time points were high, ranging from .79 to .88 for the Spanish versions and from .74 to
.89 for the English versions.
Validity
Paired t tests (range = .09-1.47) revealed no significant differences in Spanish and English subscale scores at
the first time point (full sample). At Time 2, the test-retest group scored the consensus subscale of the DAS
slightly higher in English than in Spanish, M = 53.36 (English) and 52.90 (Spanish), t = 2.43, p = .02. None of
the other subscale scores were significantly different between the English and Spanish versions, paired t tests
ranged from .11 to 1.44. Correlations (Table 3) between the English and Spanish subscales ranged from .87 to
.97 for the first time point (full sample) and from .93 to .99 for the second time point (test-retest group only, n =
39). Correlations of the Spanish-version FACES II and DAS subscales with two single-item indicators
measuring how happy respondents were with their families and their partners ranged from .26 to .45, supporting
the validity of the Spanish versions.
DISCUSSION
Psychometric findings for the Spanish versions of the FACES II and the DAS in this bilingual sample support the
reliability and validity of these newly translated measures. Coefficient alphas for the Spanish and English
versions were comparable, ranging from .74 to .89 and indicating an acceptable level of internal consistency of
the scales (alpha >.70; Nunnally, 1978). Although lower than reported by Olson et al. (1983), the English
coefficient alphas for the FACES II were better than or equal to those obtained in other studies, such as the
study by Youngblut and Brooten (2006) in which the coefficient alpha was .81 for cohesion and .64 for
adaptability. The test-retest correlations with a 2-week interval also were strong for the newly translated Spanish
versions. The test-retest correlations in this sample were .80 (Adaptability) and .88 (Cohesion) for the FACES II
and ranged from .79 to .87 for the subscales of the DAS. These correlations are equal to or higher than those
reported by Olson et al. (1983) for the FACES II-.80 for Adaptability and .83 for Cohesion-and by Carey et al.
(1993) for the subscales of the DAS-ranging from .75 to .85.
14 June 2014 Page 4 of 7 ProQuest
High correlations between the Spanish and English versions support the concurrent validity of the newly
translated scales. Three of the four correlations for the FACES II at Time 1 and Time 2 were greater than .90
(.93, .93, and .94). Likewise, all of the eight correlations for the DAS at Time 1 and Time 2 were greater than
.90, with five at .95 or greater. Correlations of the two single-item indicators of happiness with spouse/partner
and family with the subscales of the FACES II and the DAS support these instruments' construct validity,
although these correlations for the English version were lower than the correlations for the Spanish version.
Perhaps this is because the happiness items were only presented in English, making it important for analyses to
be done within language; that is, correlations of Spanish happiness items with Spanish version FACES II and
DAS may have been more comparable to the correlations between the English happiness items and the English
versions of the FACES II and the DAS.
In summary, the FACES II and the DAS are two very widely used instruments to measure family functioning and
quality of the dyadic (couple) relationship, but neither was available in Spanish. In addition, no instruments have
been published that were developed specifically to measure family functioning and couple dyadic relationship
for Hispanic families. In translating instruments from one language to another, the issue of cultural relevance
and similarity in definition and manifestation of the concept in the two cultures arises (Behling &Law, 2000;
Waltz, Strickland, &Lenz, 2005). Testing in this bilingual sample of adults supports the reliability and validity of
the newly translated Spanish versions of the FACES II and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Research that
combines qualitative and quantitative methods to understand the cultural definition of optimal family functioning
and high-quality dyadic relationships is needed. With this understanding, the cultural congruity of the FACES II
and DAS can be evaluated.
References
REFERENCES
Alegria, M., Vila, D., Woo, M., Canino, G., Takeuchi, D., Vera, M., et al. (2004). Cultural relevance and
equivalence in the NLAAS instrument: Integrating etic and emic in the development of cross-cultural measures
for a psychiatric epidemiology and services study of Latinos. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric
Research, 13, 270-288.
Behling, O., &Law, K. S. (2000). Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: Problems and
solutions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bowden, A., &Fox-Rushby, J. A. (2003). A systematic and critical review of the process of translation and
adaptation of generic health related quality of life measures in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East,
South America. Social Science Medicine, 57, 1289-1306.
Burns, D. D., &Sayers, S. L. (1992). Development and validation of a brief relationship satisfaction scale.
Unpublished manuscript.
Carey, M. P., Spector, I. P., Lantinga, L. J., &Krauss, D. J. (1993). Reliability of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale.
Psychological Assessment, 5, 238-240.
Clarke, J. P. (1984). The family types of schizophrenics, neurotics, and "normals." Dissertation Abstracts
International, 45(3-A), 962.
Compton, M. T., Thompson, N. J., &Kaslow, N. J. (2005). Social environment factors associated with suicide
attempt among low-income African Americans: The protective role of family relationships and social support.
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 40, 175-185.
Florida Department of Health. (2005). Miami-Dade County Health Profile Report, 2003. Retrieved August 10,
2006, from http://www.floridacharts.com/charts/mapp_report.aspx
Gonzalez-Gordon, R. G., Salvador-Carulla, L., Romero, C., Gonzalez-Saiz, F., &Romero, D. (2002). Feasibility,
reliability and validity of the Spanish version of Psychiatric Assessment Schedule for Adults with developmental
disability: A structured psychiatric interview for intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities Research,
46(Part 3), 209-217.
14 June 2014 Page 5 of 7 ProQuest
Harris, T. L., &Molock, S. D. (2000). Cultural orientation, family cohesion, and family support in suicide ideation
and depression among African American college students. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior, 30, 341-353.
Heyman, R. E., Sayers, S. L., &Bellack, A. S. (1994). Global marital satisfaction versus marital adjustment: An
empirical comparison of three measures. Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 432-446.
Kimmel, P. L., Peterson, R. A., Weihs, K. L., Shidler, N., Simmens, S. J., Alleyne, S., et al. (2000). Dyadic
relationship conflict, gender, and mortality in urban hemodialysis patients. Journal of the American Society of
Nephrology, 11, 1518-1525.
Lange, J. W. (2002). Methodological concerns for non-Hispanic investigators conducting research with Hispanic
Americans. Research in Nursing &Health, 25, 411-419.
Norton, R. (1983). Measuring marital quality: A critical look at the dependent variable. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 45, 141-151.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Olson, D. H. (1989). Circumplex model: VIII. Family assessment and intervention. In D. H. Olson, C. S. Russell,
&D. H. Sprenkle (Eds.), Circumplex model: Systematic assessment and treatment of families (pp. 7-19). New
York: Haworth.
Olson, D. H., McCubbin, H. I., Barnes, H., Larsen, A., Muxen, M., &Wilson, M. (1989). Family inventories. St.
Paul: University of Minnesota Family Social Science.
Olson, D. H., Portner, J., &Bell, R. (1983). Family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scores [FACES] II. In E.
E. Filsinger (Ed.), Marriage and family assessment: A sourcebook for family therapy (pp. 299-315). Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Olson, D. H., Sprenkle, D. H., &Russell, C. S. (1979). Circumplex model of marital and family systems: 1.
Cohesion and adaptability dimensions, family types, and clinical application. Family Process, 18, 3-28.
Perczek, R., Carver, C. S., Price, A. A., &Pozo-Kaderman, C. (2000). Coping, mood, and aspects of personality
in Spanish translation and evidence of convergence with English versions. Journal of Personality Assessment,
74(1), 63-87.
Rivas-Vazquez, R. A., Rivas-Vazquez, A., Blais, M. A., Rey, G. J., Rivas-Vasquez, F., Jacobo, M., et al. (2001).
Development of a Spanish version of the Schwartz Outcome Scale-10: A brief mental health outcome measure.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 77, 436-446.
Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and
similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15-28.
Thomas, R. B., &Barnard, K. E. (1986). Understanding families: A look at measures and methodologies. Zero to
Three, 6(5), 11-14.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004). We the people: Hispanics in the United States. Retrieved August 10, 2006, from
http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/censr-18pdf
Waltz, C. F., Strickland, O. L., &Lenz, E. R. (2005). Measurement in nursing and health research (3rd ed.). New
York: Springer.
Youngblut, J. M., &Brooten, D. (2006). Pediatric head trauma: Parent, parent-child and family functioning 2
weeks after hospital discharge. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 31, 608-618.
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., &Zimet, S. G. (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 30-41.
AuthorAffiliation
JoAnne M. Youngblut, PhD, RN, FAAN
Dorothy Brooten, PhD, RN, FAAN
Victoria Menzies, PhD, RN
Florida International University, Miami
AuthorAffiliation
14 June 2014 Page 6 of 7 ProQuest
Offprints. Requests for offprints should be directed to JoAnne M. Youngblut, PhD, RN, FAAN, Florida
International University, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, 11200 SW 8th St., HLS II, Miami, FL 33199.
E-mail: youngblu@fiu.edu
MeSH: Adult, Aged, Analysis of Variance, Cooperative Behavior, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Family Health --
ethnology, Female, Humans, Love, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Multilingualism, Nursing
Assessment -- standards, Nursing Evaluation Research, Personal Satisfaction, Psychometrics, Social
Adjustment, Translating, Adaptation, Psychological (major), Attitude to Health -- ethnology (major), Hispanic
Americans -- ethnology (major), Marriage -- ethnology (major), Nursing Assessment -- methods (major),
Questionnaires -- standards (major)
Publication title: Journal of Nursing Measurement
Volume: 14
Issue: 3
Pages: 181-9
Number of pages: 8
Publication year: 2006
Publication date: Winter 2006
Year: 2006
Publisher: Springer Publishing Company
Place of publication: New York
Country of publication: United States
Publication subject: Medical Sciences--Nurses And Nursing
ISSN: 10613749
Source type: Scholarly Journals
Language of publication: English
Document type: Journal Article
Accession number: 17278338
ProQuest document ID: 206309674
Document URL: http://search.proquest.com/docview/206309674?accountid=15859
Copyright: Copyright Springer Publishing Company Winter 2006
Last updated: 2014-03-29
Database: ProQuest Central
_______________________________________________________________

Contact ProQuest
Copyright 2014 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms and Conditions
14 June 2014 Page 7 of 7 ProQuest