The Parenting and Family Adjustment Scales (PAFAS): an Indonesian Validation Study

Understanding parenting risk and protective factors can help clinicians and researchers to develop effective family interventions. To have knowledge of these risk and protective factors, validated assessment tools are required. Validation studies for parenting measures with Indonesian parents are lacking, despite the need for access to parenting interventions among Indonesian families. This study aimed to validate the Parenting and Family Adjustment Scales (PAFAS), a brief parenting and family adjustment measure developed in Australia that has been validated with Panamanian and Chinese parents. A sample of 210 Indonesian parents with children aged 2–12 years old completed the Indonesian version of the PAFAS and Child Adjustment and Parent Efficacy Scale (CAPES). Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) were used for analyses. CFA resulted a four-factor PAFAS Parenting scale (15 items) and three-factor PAFAS Family adjustment scale (8 items). SEM analyses with PAFAS and CAPES revealed a good fit of the model of relationships between parent, family and child constructs to the data. The internal consistencies of PAFAS were good or acceptable, with the exception of Parental consistency. Overall, PAFAS had satisfactory psychometric properties. It is a promising measure that can potentially be used to study parenting risk and protective factors among Indonesian families. Item improvement and further validation with more diverse samples are suggested.     

Associations Between the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank and Measures of Personality and Psychopathology

The Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank (RISB; Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992) is a sentence completion test intended to detect psychological maladjustment. To investigate the construct validity of the measure, we investigated what aspects of personality and psychopathology are correlated with the RISB and also tested the incremental validity of the RISB in a combined sample of clinical (n = 72) and undergraduate participants (n = 69). Interrater reliability of the RISB was good (intraclass correlation > .80). The RISB overall adjustment score discriminated between clinical and undergraduate participants, and high scores on the RISB were associated with higher negative affect, more anxiety and depression, irrational thinking, and interpersonal problems. The incremental validity of the RISB was modest, but it did explain variance in satisfaction with life and personality disorder symptoms above and beyond an extracted measure of general psychological distress. Our findings support the construct validity of the RISB.