↓ Skip to main content

The Factor Structure of the CA-MIR as Evaluated Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Factor Structure of the CA-MIR as Evaluated Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00190
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paola Molina, Marta Casonato, Maria N. Sala, Silvia Testa

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the factor structure of the CArtes- Modèles Individuels de Relations (CA-MIR), a self-report questionnaire designed to tap into the relational strategies of adults that was developed by a French-speaking research group coordinated by Blaise Pierrehumbert. The CA-MIR's particular merit lies in the richness and complexity of the theoretical model underpinning it. However, to date, this model has only been partially reproduced in studies using exploratory analysis and has never been tested via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Objective and Method: We thus conducted CFA on data collected from a sample of 979 subjects, recruited using a snowball sampling method during the spring and fall of 2005. To assess if some item multidimensionality was present, we estimated both the independent clusters model (ICM-CFA) and a model in which some zero loading restrictions were removed. Results: The results supported the originally proposed structure of the CA-MIR; the large majority of items were good indicators of the expected latent dimensions and only few items showed relevant secondary loadings or loaded in an unexpected factor. The instrument adequately differentiates the three attachment styles, taking into account both past and present experiences of attachment relationships, and providing a rich and complex assessment of multiple features of attachment. In terms of internal consistency, alpha values were satisfactory and comparable to those found in the original Swiss validation study. Conclusions: Our results are of key importance for both research and clinical work, given the lack of valid and easy-to-administer tools for evaluating adult attachment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Researcher 2 12%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 41%
Arts and Humanities 3 18%
Unspecified 2 12%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 6%
Neuroscience 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,374,920
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,267
of 30,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,247
of 331,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#387
of 567 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,153 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 567 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.