Reliability and validity of the Emotional Availability Scale among Hispanic and African American mother-toddler dyads.

摘要

Emotional availability (EA) represents the emotional expression and responsiveness of the mother-child dyad. Emotional availability is measured by the Emotional Availability Scale (EAS) which is a global observation tool. Cross-cultural research is often conducted with measurement tools that were originally developed for the Caucasians. Systematic application of the EAS across cultures could introduce bias and would produce invalid results. Fair comparison of scores between race/ethnic groups would not be possible and conclusions drawn from EA results would not be accurate. No psychometric testing of the EAS among other race/ethnicities to determine cross-cultural validity was published. This study examined EA differences between Caucasian. Hispanic, and African American dyads to determine reliability and validity of the Emotional Availability Scale (EAS). A cross-sectional, matched design study was conducted with rerecorded play sessions of Hispanic and African American mother-child dyads. Dyads were matched on maternal age, maternal education, and child gender. Differences of EAS between race/ethnicities were analyzed with ANOVAs. Relationships between EAS dimensions and behaviors represented by the Dyadic Parent Child Interaction Coding System (DPICS) were analyzed with correlations and Matched Moderated Regression (MMR). There were no significant differences in EA by race/ethnicity. Eight significant correlations between EAS dimensions and DPICS behaviors occurred for the entire sample. Seven EAS dimensions were predicted by DPICS behaviors for the entire sample regardless of race/ethnicity and four predictive relationships, impacted by race/ethnicity occurred. For the predictive relationships moderated by race/ethnicity, two different DPICS behaviors predicted the same EAS maternal dimensions for both Hispanic and African American dyads. These results carry implications related to ethical conduct of cross-cultural research using tools that were not validated for target populations, shoring up educational resources for cross-cultural researchers, and a responsibility to develop policies and procedures to ensure competent use of research findings.