Designing and Psychometric Evaluation of Nurses’ Social Responsibility Instrument: A Mixed Method Study

Zahra Hadian Jazi, Hamid Peyrovi, Armin Zareiyan


Background: To provide excellent nursing care services, nursing standards should be considered; one of these standards is being socially responsible. Regarding the lack of appropriate instruments in Iran for measuring social responsibility, the design of an instrument in accordance with Iranian culture seems to be necessary. So, the present study aimed to design a valid and reliable tool for measuring the social responsibility of nurses.

Materials and Methods: In this sequential exploratory mixed‑method study, designing and psychometric evaluation of nurses’ social responsibility instrument were performed in qualitative and quantitative phases. In the qualitative phase, the concept of nurses’ social responsibility was explored and its characteristics and dimensions were identified using a hybrid concept analysis model. In the quantitative phase, validity (face, content, and construct), and reliability (Cronbach’s α and interclass correlation) were examined a sample of nurses in Tehran, Iran (n = 280). The construct validity of the scale was determined using exploratory factor analysis.

Results: The findings supported 23 items in four factors: dedicated to others, efforts to improve social conditions, holistic vision, and favorable relationship. A total of 44.40% of the variance was explained by these four factors. Scale‑Content Validity Index/Average (S‑CVI/AVE) was calculated 0.91 and it was found that the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.88.

Conclusions: The researchers focused on designing and psychometric evaluation of nursing social responsibility tools based on nurses’ opinions and prepared a native, valid, and reliable tool, which seems to be a good tool for measuring the social responsibility of nurses.


Exploratory factor analysis, nursing, psychometrics, social responsibility

Full Text:



Babamahmodi F, Meftahi M, Khademlo M, Hesamzadeh A. Evaluation of patient rights, patient perspective. J Med Ethics Hist Med 2011;4:37 44.

Duane W. Corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility: A positive theory approach. J Bus Res 2013;66:1937 44.

Peterson C, Seligman ME. Character, Strengths, and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification. 1st ed. Washington D.C.: Oxford University Press; 2004. p. 450 80.

Tyer Viola L, Nicholas PK, Corless IB. Social responsibility of nursing: A global perspective. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 2009;10:110 9

Mohajeran B, Shohoodi M. Structural modeling of relationship between professional ethics and spirituality at work with social responsibility among nurses in the public hospitals in Kermanshah city. Q J Nurs Manag 2014;3:20 9.

Talebi A, Khoshbin Y. Youth social responsibility. Soc Sci 2010;59:207 40.

Doward LC, Mead MD, Tharsen H. Requirement for quality of life instrument in clinical research. Value Health 2004;7:134 9.

Hassanian ZM, Sadeghi A, Bagheri A, Moghimbeighi A. Nurses’ social responsibility and its relationship with their demographic profiles. Sci J Hamadan Nurs Midwifery Fac 2017;25:45 53.

Creswell JW, Clark VLP. Designing and conducting mixed methods research, Wiley online library. 2007.

Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005;15:1277 88.

Hajizadeh E, Asghari M. Statistical Methods and Analyses in Health and Biosciences a Research Methodological Approach. Tehran: Jahade Daneshgahi Publications; 2011.

Cook DA, Beckman TJ. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: Theory and application. Am J Med 2006;119:166 7.

Lawshe C. A qualitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol 1975;25:563 75.

Polite D, Beck C. Nursing research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.

Polkinghorne DE. Language and meaning: Data collection in qualitative research. J Couns Psychol 2005;52:137 45.

Hair JF, Anderson RE, Babin BJ, Black WC, Babin BJ. Multivariate Data Analysis: A global perspective. 7th ed. NJ: Pearson Upper Saddle River; 2009

Munro BH. Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.

Massey P, Prelip M, Calimlim B, Afifi A, Quiter E, Nessim S, et al. Findings toward a multidimensional measure of adolescent health literacy. Am J Health Behav 2013;37:342 50.

Murphy KR, Davidshofer CO. Psychological Testing: Principles and Applications. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice Hall; 2001.

Browne M. An Overview of Analytic Rotation in Exploratory Factor Analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2001;36:111-50.

Faseleh Jahromi M, Moattari M, Peyrovi H. Iranian nurses’perceptions of social responsibility: A qualitative study. Nurs Ethics 2014;21:289 98.

Salehi Amiri SR, Motahhari Nejad SM. Promoting Corporate Social Responsibility with an Islamic Approach. Soc Sci 2010;61:9-50.[Persian].

Nakamura M, Watanab Muraoka AM. Global Social Responsibility; Developing a Scale for Senior High School Student in Japan. Int J Adv Couns 2006;28:213.

Moshabaki A, Khalili Shojaiy V. Investigating the relationship between organization culture and corporate social responsibility. Appl Sociol 2011;21:37 56.

Mergler A, Shield P. Development of a measure of personal responsibility for adolescent. J Adolesc 2016;51:50 7.

Carroll AB. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons 1991;34:39 48.

Westen D, Robert R. Quantifying construct validity: Two simple measures. J Pers Soc Psychol 2003;84:608 18.


  • There are currently no refbacks.