Construction and Validity of an Instrument to Evaluate Renewable Energies and Energy Sustainability Perceptions for Social Consciousness

Abstract

: The construction and content validity of an instrument to evaluate the perception and social consciousness on renewable resources and energy sustainability was done. First, a review and analysis of the existing instruments in the literature was carried out. The instrument was constructed, then reviewed by three experts, and submitted to the judgment of nine experts. Finally, it was applied to a group of twenty people to evaluate instruction and question accuracy. The instrument is integrated with four dimensions: knowledge on renewable energy; the perception of benefits obtained from it; willingness to acquire renewable energy equipment and evaluation of the use of wind and solar energies importance; the degree of personal and social awareness on environmental care as well as information on specific habits on how important it is to promote and practice energy-saving and environmental sustainability. The experts’ revision process resulted in the approval of the instrument. Content validity (Aiken’s V > 0.75; VI > 0.50) was confirmed. The results of the pilot sample showed a favorable opinion, the understanding of the instructions and items, and the attainment of an optimal value in reliability (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.8553). It was concluded that the instrument is valid to evaluate the perception and degree of consciousness on renewable energies and energy sustainability constructs.

Development and Validation of a Revised VAS-Anxiety Measurement Tools for Preschool Hospitalized Children

“…In this study, the instrument was approved after the experts' revision process. Aiken's V:0,825 content validity index was confirmed (Acosta-Banda et al, 2021). Experts advise to more specific questions so that child is easier to understand, such as the content "Does Your sleep is disturbed?"…”

“…The first phase develops the instrument items based on literature reviews and pre-existing instruments. The second involves the expert panel, and the third is the psychometric analysis (Acosta-Banda et al, 2021;Morgado et al, 2017).…”

“…Expert judgement determines the validity of the content. In an expert review, some grammatical and spelling issues, as well as the correction of some answer descriptors, were fixed to improve the instrument's quality (Acosta-Banda et al, 2021). The content validity is assessed based on how well the instrument content represents the overall subject, and the knowledge level (aspects) will be measured.…”

“…The content validity was determined using the content validity index (CVI) with a 4-point rating system of relevance level (from 1 = irrelevant and 4 = highly relevant), then re-recorded as 1 (relevance scale 3 or 4) and 0 (relevance scale 1 or 2). The CVI (I-CVI) judgement of the item is calculated as the number of experts giving the relevant rating divided by the total number of experts; the I-CVI is not lower than 0.78 (Yusoff, 2019) or 0.75 (Acosta-Banda et al, 2021). In this study, the instrument was approved after the experts' revision process.…”

“…Twenty-one and sixty respondents were recruited for the preliminary and exploratory tests, respectively. The reliability coefficient was determined through a pilot test by collecting 20 (Acosta-Banda et al, 2021), 13 participants in a preliminary study (Takemura et al, 2021), and 20 to 30 subjects not included in the research samples (Bolarinwa, 2015) Based on (Tsang, Royse & Terkawi, 2017), respondent-to-item ratio advice ranged from 5:1 there were a total of sixty respondents. The inclusion criteria of this study were children aged three to six years, having their first experience of being hospitalized, receiving intravenous therapy, and not having a diagnosis of a chronic disease.…”