Citation

Li Y, Ma ZJ, Zhang YQ. Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2022; 56(3): 365-369.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Zhonghua yi xue hui)

DOI

10.3760/cma.j.cn112150-20211125-01087

PMID

35381661

Abstract

To explore and revise the factor structure, reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Driver Stress Inventory (DSI) in the driver population in first-tier city of China. In this study, the questionnaire method was used to select the data collected by the "Research on the Driving Stress of Urban Salaries in Urban Traffic" carried out by the Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2012, and a third-party survey agency was commissioned to select 300 people in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou respectively. A total of 900 drivers (with 889 valid data scales) were used to test their driving stress and other indicators by using the DSI and the self-compiled travel and stress relief scale. The test content collects driver self-reported stress data from five dimensions: Aggression, Dislike of driving, Hazard-Monitoring, Fatigue Proneness and Thrill-seeking. The DSI questionnaire of 445 cardinal numbers was revised by item analysis methods such as correlation test and T-test, and exploratory factor analysis method based on principal component analysis and optimal skew axis method (Promax).The results of item analysis showed that the total correlation coefficient of 10 items of the 48 items of the original DSI scale was lower than 0.3, and the total correlation coefficient of 6 items was not significant (r=-0.078-0.079, P>0.05), and the high and low groups were independent. There were significant differences in the results of the sample t test (t=-16.642-0.091, P<0.001), the 16 items were deleted, and the remaining 32 items; exploratory factor analysis showed that KMO=0.938>0.900, and the Bartlett's sphericity test result was significant (χ²=6 361.974, df=496, P<0.001), suitable for exploratory factor analysis, the results showed that 2 items constituted independent factors, did not meet the relevant standards of psychometrics and were deleted, and finally retained 30 items, and the internal consistency coefficient of the new scale was better than the original one(α=0.932>0.877); Based on the results of exploratory factor analysis, the model fitting indexes of 444 even-numbered samples such as RMSEA, SRMR, CFI and TLI were verified by confirmatory factor analysis, and the results showed that the index of each index was good (χ²=1 250.447, RMSEA=0.070, SRMR=0.068, CFI=0.839, TLI=0.823); criterion validity analysis found that each factor of the revised scale was significantly correlated with situational anxiety (r=0.190-0.556, P<0.01). In conclusion, the DSI (Chinese version) has good reliability and validity, and can be used as an assessment tool for driver stress in China.

Language: zh