Sentences with phrase «scale ranging»

Negative parenting was assessed using the Parental Cognition and Conduct Toward the Infant Scale, which includes dimensions such as coercitive parenting (7 items) and overprotection (5 items), each rated on a scale ranging 0 to 10; overall scores were z - standardized [34].

Items are rated on a 4 - point Likert scale ranging from wholly not true / never or seldom (0) to completely true / very frequently (3).

Participants» level of need threat [91] was assessed after the game using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (don't agree at all) to 7 (totally agree).

Both women and men estimated how frequently they experienced the described feelings by using a six - point scale ranging from not more than usual (0) to much more than usual (5).

Items are completed on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly low) to 4 (strongly high).

All 112 items of the YSR are to be answered on a 3 - point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 2 (often), with higher scores indicating more problems.

The coding system contained 27 items on a 9 - point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 9 (very much), indicating the extent to which the behavior was present during the discussion task.

Children are asked to rate each of the 13 items on a 3 - point scale ranging from 0 to 2 in terms of intensity of depressive symptoms during the past 2 weeks (e.g., «I felt miserable or unhappy», «I did everything wrong»).

It comprises the three scales «symptom - focused rumination», «self - focused rumination» and «distraction» for which participants are asked to indicate their normal behavior when feeling sad or depressed on a Likert - type scale ranging from 1 («almost never») to 4 («almost always»).

Items are rated on a 4 - point scale ranging from 0 to 3 in terms of intensity of symptoms (e.g., change in appetite) and attitudes (e.g., pessimism) during the past 2 weeks.

The spouses were asked to assess their marital relationships on a six - point scale ranging from 0 to 5.

All variables were coded on a 5 - point Likert scale ranging from 1 (none) to 5 (high).

The item «I was ignored» on the questionnaire following the cyberball game acted as a manipulation check to ensure that ostracism was recognized as such (Likert scale ranging from 1 (don't agree at all) to 7 (totally agree)-RRB-.

Mothers were asked to rate each of the 113 items on a 3 - point scale ranging from 0 (does not apply to the child) to 2 (clearly or often).

Items are rated on 5 - point Likert scale ranging from «never» to «often» or from «not characteristic» to «very characteristic», according to the occurrence of problematic behaviors in the child.

These are assessed with two items on a Likert - type scale ranging from 1 («doesn't apply at all») to 5 («applies completely») referring to how much the statements apply to the participants behavior.

On a Likert - type scale ranging from 0 («strongly agree») to 3 («strongly disagree»), respondents indicate the extent to which they agree with each statement.

Following the recommendations of Ickes, Stinson, Bissonette and Garcia [21], five judges compared each inferred thought / feeling entry with the corresponding actual thought / feeling entry and rated their level of similarity on a 3 - point scale ranging from 0 (essentially different content) through 1 (somewhat similar but not the same content) to 2 (essentially the same content).

Adolescents reported, on a five - point Likert scale ranging from 1 (disagree strongly or very bad idea) to 5 (agree strongly or very good idea), on their attitudes toward sex (e.g., «Not having sex will help me feel good about myself») and on their attitudes about using condoms (e.g., «How do you feel about using a condom if you had sex in the next 3 months?»).

Respondents are asked to rate each item on a 5 - point Likert scale ranging from 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 5 (extremely satisfied).

Reliability and validity of the DASS have been well established.7, 15 Respondents report how frequently they have experienced each symptom in the past week on a scale ranging from zero («not at all») to 3 («most of the time»).

Then, respondents rated the degree to which the father's involvement was helpful in promoting family coping with the illness, again on a five - choice Likert scale ranging from «harder» to «much easier.»

Participants were asked to indicate how often such events occurred on a Likert scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (always) with higher scores reflecting a greater number of negative life events.

Items reflecting behaviours involving helping peers and exhibiting concern for them were rated by the teachers on a four - point scale ranging from not applicable (0) to fully applicable (3).

Ratings were on a 6 - point scale ranging from «never» to «at least once a week».

All items are scored using a six - point Likert scale ranging from 1 (I do not agree) to 6 (I totally agree).

Participants were asked to indicate how much they used these strategies to cope with problems on 5 - point scale ranging from «Never» to «Very Often,» with higher scores indicating more frequent use of that coping strategy.

Family income was reported separately by mothers and fathers on a scale ranging from 1 to 11 with 1, < $ 10,000; 5, $ 40,000 — 49,999; 10, $ 90,999 — 99,999; and 11, > $ 100,000.

Each item is answered on a 6 - point scale ranging from strongly disagree (6) to strongly agree (1).

All items could be answered on a 5 - point scale ranging from 1 = never, to 5 = always.

Participants rated how frequently they exchanged these six types of support with their mother on an 8 - point scale ranging from 1 (less than once a year or not at all) to 8 (daily)(α = 0.79).

Items are scored on a five - point Likert scale ranging from «never» to «at least once a day.»

Family Support Scale (FSS), developed by Dunst, Trivette and Jenkins in 1984, includes 19 items that are rated on a five - point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all helpful) to 5 (extremely helpful).

Participants are asked to rate items using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (very false) to 4 (very true) with higher scores reflecting a greater level of perceived control.

The 12 items are rated on a 5 - point scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always), and the measure has excellent psychometric properties, including validity and reliability [36].

Participants indicated their agreement to the statements on a 5 - point Likert scale ranging from «Strongly Disagree» to «Strongly Agree», with a neutral response option in the middle.

Participants are asked to answer on a 5 - point Likert scale ranging from 5 (extremely important / strongly agree) to 1 (not at all important / strongly disagree).

Participants were asked to answer on a 4 - point Likert scale ranging from 0 (completely disagree) to 3 (strongly agree).

All items were rated on a five - point Likert scale ranging from «Completely not agree» (1) to «Completely agree» (5).

Mothers rated five items reflecting problems in the partner relationship, such as disagreements about childrearing and providing or receiving little partner support, along a three - point scale ranging from never (0) to always applicable (2).

Participants respond to the items on a 7 - point scale ranging from 0 (unlikely) to 4 (very likely).

First, respondents rated the frequency with which the father performed that task in the prior 6 months on a five - choice Likert scale ranging from 1, «never» to 5, «always.»

These ratings indicate how frequently the mothers display a number of parenting behaviors toward the target child, on a 5 - point Likert scale ranging from never to always.

Parents report, on a five - point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always) regarding whether they reward their child for appropriate behaviors.

Each of the five items was rated on a nine - point scale ranging from 0 (not at all a problem) to 8 (severely impaired) so that the total scores range between 0 and 40.22 The psychometric properties have been validated in large patient with CFS cohorts confirming that WSAS is a reliable assessment tool for disability.

The participants rated their feeling toward a partner on the items using a 1 — 5 Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

It comprises of 125 - items to be answered on a 5 - point Likert scale ranging from very dissatisfied to very satisfied that are grouped into 14 domains; Idealistic Distortion, Marital Satisfaction, Personality Issues, Communication, Conflict Resolution, Financial Management, Leisure Activities, Sexual Relationship, Children and Parenting, Family and Friends, Equalitarian Roles, Religious Orientation, Marital Cohesion and Marital Change (Fowers & Olson, 1989).

Responses were on a 4 - point scale ranging from 1 (not at all true of me) to 4 (very true of me).

Respondents indicate how often they engage in each of the examples of rumination using a 4 - point rating scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 4 (almost always).

2) Brazilian version of a general scale of relationship satisfaction (Schumm et al., 1986), translated and validated in a sample of 342 participants with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of.90 (Wachelke, De Andrade, Souza, & Cruz, 2007), a measure composed by three items [«I am satisfied with my relationship», «I am satisfied with my companion in what concerns his / her role in the relationship» and «I am satisfied with my relationship with my companion»] completed in a 5 - point Likert scale ranging from 1 = «strongly disagree» to 5 = «strongly agree».