社会杂志

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

自评一般健康的信度和效度分析

  

  1. 齐亚强  中国人民大学社会学系
  • 出版日期:2014-11-20 发布日期:2014-11-20
  • 通讯作者: 齐亚强 中国人民大学社会学系 E-mail:qiyaqiang@ruc.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    本研究受中国人民大学科学研究基金（中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助）项目（13XNJ034）资助。

Reliability and Validity of SelfRated General Health

  1. QI Yaqiang，Department of Sociology，Renmin University of China
  • Online:2014-11-20 Published:2014-11-20
  • Contact: QI Yaqiang，Department of Sociology，Renmin University of China E-mail:qiyaqiang@ruc.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    This research is supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities and the Research Funds of Renmin University of China (13XNJ034).

PDF

1093

摘要： 本文利用2008年“中国流动与健康调查”（IMHC）数据，分析了自评一般健康指标的信度和效度。研究发现，自评一般健康具有较好的信度，被访者先后两次回答的结果高度一致，两次回答结果的微小变动表现为随机性的波动，而非系统性偏差。该指标在一定程度上会受到调查中题目次序效应的影响。关于自评一般健康指标效度的分析发现，该指标能够有效反映被访者自我感知的各种健康状态和个体既有的关于自身健康的知识，但不能很好地反映个体无法感知的机体变化等健康问题。自评一般健康存在较为复杂的回答偏误问题，受不同年龄、社会经济地位群体关于健康的评价标准、期望与认知差异的影响，其回答结果在不同人群中的可比性值得商榷。

关键词: 信度 , 回答偏误, 自评一般健康 , 效度

Abstract: Using data from the 2008 Survey of Internal Migration and Health in China, this study examines the reliability and validity of selfrated general health for the Chinese population. Results show that selfrated general health is a highly reliable measure of individual health. Two repeated measures of selfrated general health in the survey are quite consistent and the difference between the two answers reflects random variations rather than any systematic biases. Nonetheless, there is also some evidence that selfrated general health is likely to be affected by question orders in a survey.
In addition, this study examines the validity and potential reporting bias of selfrated general health by fitting Hopit models. Results show that selfrated general health is a valid summary measure of individual’s selfperceived and known health conditions, although it does not reflect bodily functional changes that can hardly be perceived. The response of selfrated general health is strongly correlated with respondent’s chronic medical conditions, the occurrence of acute illness, selfperceived pains/discomfort, insomnia symptoms and depression; however, it is only weakly correlated with objective biometrics such as blood pressure and lung capacity.
Finally, it is worth noting that there exists complicated reporting heterogeneity in selfrated general health among different social groups. Due to differences in rating standard, expectation and cognitive capability regarding health, different social groups respond to the question of selfrated general health differently. After controlling for all the specific measures of individual health in the data, older respondents tend to underestimate their true health status, while those better educated and respondents with higher family incomes tend to overestimate their true health conditions. The existence of reporting heterogeneity is likely to hamper the crosspopulation comparability of selfrated general health.

Key words: reliability , validity , reporting heterogeneity, self-rated general health