Search

Background: Daily, we tend to evaluate things positively or negatively, according to whether they follow the general information available about them. This attitudinal assessment is represented through evaluative dimensions (e.g., good‐bad) that vary in terms of valence (positive or negative) and strength (less or more). Despite its importance, there is an urge in food allergy (FA) research to properly assess attitudes based on the underlying mechanisms that define attitudes. Objective: The present research aimed to develop the Attitudes Towards Food Allergy scale (ATFAS), the first attitudinal measure of FA. Method: Two studies were performed (n = 1049), using a range of robust statistical analyses (e.g., Item Response Theory, Exploratory Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis). Results: Our results provided strong evidence for a unidimensional attitudinal structure, across groups of non‐allergic individuals and food‐allergic, besides recommended reliability levels. All items presented suitable parameters (i.e., discrimination, difficulty, information). Finally, the ATFAS significantly predicted FA quality of life, mediated by FA anxiety. Conclusion: We are confident that the ATFAS is a novel and necessary measure, that can help to widen how we view and assess FA. The development of studies that assess attitudes towards FA based on our general information about the disorder would help to deepen our understanding of their links to other health‐related variables and their potential impact on quality of life, reduce FA's stigma, and develop more positive attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aimed to explore the psychometric parameters of the Dirty Dozen through the Item Response Theory (IRT), using the Graduated Response Model. Participants included 284 individuals, with a mean age of 24.2 years (SD = 8.76). Initially the dimensionality of the scale was checked and results that support a three-oblique-factor structure were found (CFI = 0.99; TLI = 0.98; RMSEA = 0.03). Therefore, IRT analyses were performed separately for each factor. Then, it was verifed that the items discriminate participants properly, being those items belonging to the narcissism factor the ones mostly endorsed; Machiavellianism and psychopathy demanded a greater amount of theta in order to agree with the item content, perhaps because these traits are socially undesirable. It is considered that the aims of the study were achieved, providing evidence of this short measure through the IRT, showing the possibilities of its use in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]