The sibling relationship and its potential impact on neurodevelopment and mental health are important areas of neuroscientific research. Validation of the tools assessing the quality of the sibling relationship would be the first essential step for conducting neurobiological and psychosocial studies related to the sibling relationship. However, to the best of our knowledge, no sibling relationship assessment tools have been empirically validated in Korean. We aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Lifespan Sibling Relationship Scale (LSRS), which is one of the most commonly used self-report questionnaires to assess the quality of the sibling relationship. A total of 109 adults completed a series of self-report questionnaires including the LSRS, the mental health subscale of the Medical Outcomes Study-Short Form 36 version 2 (SF36v2), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SLS), and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MC-SDS). The internal consistency, subscale intercorrelations, one-week test-retest reliability, convergent validity, divergent validity, and the construct validity were assessed. All six subscale scores and the total score of the LSRS demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.85-0.94) and good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.77-0.92). Correlations of the LSRS with the SF36v2 mental health score (r=0.32, p=0.01) and with the SLS (r=0.27, p=0.04) supported the good convergent validity. The divergent validity was shown by the non-significant correlation of the LSRS with the MC-SDS (r=0.15, p=0.26). Two factors were extracted through factor analysis, which explained 78.63% of the total variance. The three Adult subscales loaded on the first factor and the three Child subscales loaded on the second factor. Results suggest that the Korean version of the LSRS is a reliable and valid tool for examining the sibling relationship.

No abstract

The purpose of this randomised crossover study is to validate the Korean version of the Affective Go/No-go (AGN) test. The Korean words for the AGN test were selected after careful evaluation of emotional valences, word length and frequency. Fifteen Korean advanced learners of English were administered both Korean and English versions, yielding 30 data points. The performance of both language versions was compared for each of the AGN test parameters (response latency, commission error and omission error) using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were estimated to evaluate associations between the two versions. The ICCs were high for response latencies of all valences and commission errors of positive and neutral words, but not for that of negative words and omission errors of all valences. A similar pattern of test results, as revealed by the high ICCs and non-significant interaction effects between language and word valence, suggests that the psychometric properties of the AGN test may be comparable over different language versions.

No abstract