ArticleBMC psychology2025
Development of a questionnaire to better understand verbal violence among college students: preliminary results from a cluster random sample.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study developed the College Student Verbal Violence Questionnaire and conducted a questionnaire survey using this instrument to comprehensively understand verbal violence among college students.
methodsA cross-sectional design was adopted to conduct a collective survey on three samples through Wenjuanxing (an online survey platform). We selected four higher vocational colleges in Guangzhou, China, for the sampling population. A cluster random sampling method was used to obtain data from 1,092 students. Item analysis and exploratory factor analysis were conducted on this sample, followed by a confirmatory factor analysis and reliability and validity testing with 713 students. Finally, a questionnaire survey on verbal violence was conducted involving 1,102 students.
resultsThe College Student Verbal Violence Questionnaire comprises 19 items across five dimensions: Verbal Violence Evaluation, Duration of Verbal Violence Impact, Verbal Violence Behaviors, Emotions Related to Verbal Violence, and Family Verbal Violence. Internal consistency coefficients of the overall scale and each dimension ranged from 0.750 to 0.946, and the test–retest reliability coefficients ranged from 0.742 to 0.936. The questionnaire demonstrated good content, structural, discriminant, and convergent validities. The results indicated that the level of verbal violence experienced by current college students was higher than the moderate level. Female students scored significantly higher than male students in the dimensions of Verbal Violence Evaluation, Duration of Verbal Violence Impact, Verbal Violence Behaviors, Emotions Related to Verbal Violence, and the total score of the questionnaire. College students from urban areas scored significantly higher than those from rural areas in the Emotions Related to Verbal Violence dimension. A positive correlation was observed between the level of verbal violence and mental health.
conclusionsThe College Student Verbal Violence Questionnaire is an initially promising tool for measuring verbal violence among college students. This study demonstrated that the level of verbal violence among college students positively correlated with their mental health. These findings help to accurately understand and analyze verbal violence among college students, which can help government education departments to prioritize and address the issue, thereby preventing it. However, additional research is required in the future to further enhance the tool’s validity evidence.
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.