Cited by 11Psychometric Methodologies and TestingAttachment and Relationship DynamicsHealth Education and Validation

Psychometric evaluation of the parentification inventory–Swahili version with Kenyan adults: Factor structure, reliability, and validity

Hooper, Lisa M., Mugoya, George C. T., Burton, Shelby, Tomek, Sara·2020·Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development

Abstract

The immediate concerns and aftereffects of parentification in the United States are well documented. However, the correlates of parentification in international communities are less known. This psychometric study explored the validity of a Swahili version of the Parentification Inventory (PI; Hooper, 2009) with a sample of 279 Kenyan adults. Factor analysis produced a 3‐factor structure, but with fewer items (N = 17) than in the original PI (N = 22). Recommendations for using the PI–Swahili Version are discussed. Las preocupaciones inmediatas y las secuelas de la parentificación en los Estados Unidos están bien documentadas. Sin embargo, las correlaciones de la parentificación en comunidades internacionales son menos conocidas. Este estudio psicométrico exploró la validez de una versión en suajili del Inventario de Parentificación (PI, por sus siglas en inglés; Hooper, 2009) en una muestra de 279 kenianos adultos. El análisis factorial produjo una estructura de 3 factores, pero con menos elementos (N = 17) que en el PI original (N = 22). Se discuten recomendaciones para el uso de la versión en suajili del PI.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jmcd.12164

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The parentification inventory has been translated into many languages and has demonstrated reliability and validity in studies across continents-North America, Australia, South America, Africa, Europe, and Asia.

    “The fact that the parentification inventory has been translated into many languages and has demonstrated reliability and validity in studies across continents—North America, Australia, South America [165], Africa [166], Europe [167], and Asia [55]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hooper, L. M., Mugoya, G. C. T., Burton, S., & Tomek, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Northern Iowa (US)
  • University of Alabama (US)
  • University of Louisville (US)
  • Baylor University (US)
Corresponding author
Hooper, Lisa M.
Venue
Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
58-78
ISSN
  • 0883-8534 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-1912
OpenAlex
W2998706016
Cited by
11
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development (publishedVersion)
  • UNI ScholarWorks (University of Northern Iowa) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
parentification, cross-cultural adaptation, factor structure, reliability statistics, validity, international community

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review