Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar 6:11:359.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00359. eCollection 2020.

Validation of the Czech Version of the Relational Needs Satisfaction Scale

Martina Pourová  1 , Tomáš Řiháček  1 , Gregor Žvelc  2   3   4
Affiliations

Validation of the Czech Version of the Relational Needs Satisfaction Scale

Martina Pourová et al. Front Psychol. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Aim: If we want to understand people's satisfaction in their relationships, it is essential to have a valid and reliable measure of relational needs satisfaction. The aim of this study was to test the factor structure of the Czech version of the Relational Needs Satisfaction Scale (RNSS) as well as the scale's measurement invariance and convergent validity.

Method: In total, 419 adults answered a battery of measures, including the RNSS, in an online survey. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test the factor structure and the measurement invariance of the RNSS across gender and age. A correlational analysis was conducted to assess the convergent validity.

Results: The five-factor structure of the RNSS was confirmed. Furthermore, support for a second-order global relationship satisfaction factor was found. The hierarchical model was strictly invariant with respect to gender and age. Furthermore, the RNSS demonstrated an expected pattern of correlations with the reference instruments.

Conclusion: The Czech version of the RNSS can be considered a valid and reliable method.

Keywords: convergent validity; factor structure; measurement invariance; psychometrics; relational needs satisfaction scale.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Clusters based on the satisfaction of relational needs.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
The hierarchical model, χ2(165) = 317.656, p < 0.001, BIC = 21537.633, SRMR = 0.05, RMSEA = 0.051, TLI = 0.942.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ainsworth M. D. S., Blehar M. C., Waters E., Wall S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    1. Andersen P. A., Eloy S. V., Guerrero L. K., Spitzberg B. H. (1995). Romantic jealousy and relational satisfaction: a look at the impact of jealousy experience and expression. Commun. Rep. 8 77–85. 10.1080/08934219509367613 - DOI
    1. Barkham M., Margison F., Leach C., Lucock M., Mellor-Clark J., Evans C., et al. (2001). Service profiling and outcomes benchmarking using the CORE-OM: toward practice-based evidence in the psychological therapies. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 69 184–196. 10.1037/0022-006X.69.2.184 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bech P., Olsen L., Kjoller M., Rasmussen N. (2003). Measuring well-being rather than the absence of distress symptoms: a comparison of the SF-36 mental health subscale and the WHO-Five well-being scale. Int. J. Methods Psychiatr. Res. 12 85–91. 10.1002/mpr.145 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bowlby J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. London: Penguin Books.

LinkOut - more resources