ArticleBMC psychology2025
Psychometric properties of the Persian version of the ambivalent ageism scale (benevolent and hostile) in the adult population in Iran.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the growing population of older adults and the prevalence of negative attitudes towards them, the issue of ageism and its health and economic impacts in both benevolent and hostile contexts warrants special attention. It is crucial to examine the attitudes of other age groups towards older adults across different societies. Particularly, the benevolent dimension of ageism, which has been less explored in research, requires more focus. Therefore, this study aims to conduct a psychometric evaluation of The Ambivalent Ageism Scale among the adult population in Iran.
methodsThis methodological study was conducted in comprehensive health centers in Gorgan city in 2023. A total of 381 eligible adults participated. The Ambivalent Ageism Scale (AAS) was utilized, and the psychometric assessment included translation, face validity, and content validity. Additionally, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were performed. The reliability of the scale was evaluated using the internal consistency method. The research findings were analyzed using SPSS and AMOS software version 24.
resultsQualitative face and content validity assessments led to textual and editorial modifications of the items. The Content Validity Ratio (CVR), Item-Content Validity Index (I-CVI), and Kappa (K*) scores were acceptable for all items. In the exploratory factor analysis (EFA), similar to the original questionnaire, three factors were extracted, accounting for approximately 54% of the total variance. The fit indices in the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated an acceptable model fit. During CFA, four items were eliminated. The reliability of the entire questionnaire was deemed acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.763. Consequently, the Persian version of the Ambivalent Ageism Scale was confirmed with nine items.
conclusionThe Persian version of The Ambivalent Ageism Scale demonstrates sufficient validity and reliability for measuring attitudes towards aging within Iranian society. Given the cultural adaptation of this tool, the questionnaire can be utilized to assess adults' views and attitudes towards older adults in both hostile and benevolent dimensions. Furthermore, it can aid in formulating family-oriented policies for older adult care and facilitate improvements in the quality of care for this population group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.