Validation of the English Language Version of the Violent Ideations Scale

Abstract

This study used a within-participant design to evaluate the concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of the Violent Ideations Scale in a general population, English-speaking opportunistic sample. Data from 116 adult participants ( M age = 33.7, SD = 11.9, male = 30 [25.9%]) were used to compare scores on the Violent Ideations Scale and Aggression Questionnaire and responses to the Schedule of Imagined Violence. A subgroup of 27 participants ( M age = 37.2, SD = 13.6, male = 8 [29.6%]) completed the Violent Ideations Scale on a second occasion, 2 weeks later. The Violent Ideations Scale was found to correlate significantly with the Aggression Questionnaire subscale and total scores, with the strongest correlations being with physical aggression and total scores. Participants were more likely to be categorized as having experienced a violent ideation based on responses to the Violent Ideation Scale, compared with the Schedule of Imagined Violence, most likely due to the Schedule of Imagined Violence underestimating the prevalence of violent ideation. A significant, strong correlation was found between total Violent Ideations Scale scores at Time 1 and Time 2. Overall, the Violent Ideations Scale was found to have concurrent validity when compared with the Aggression Questionnaire and good test–retest reliability, suggesting that it would be suitable for use with a nonclinical, English-speaking sample.

Validation of the Violent Ideations Scale (VIS) in Spain

“…Factor structure. Previous validation studies examining the VIS showed unidimensionality for the scores of the measure (McKenzie et al, 2021;Murray et al, 2018). Given that the VIS has already been validated in German and English, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to test the scale dimensionality with one-factor solutions with the Spanish sample.…”

“…Due to the purpose of the study, the items related to psychological aggression were excluded, resulting in a 10-item version. The English version (McKenzie et al, 2021) also provided satisfactory psychometric indicators, test-retest reliability ( r (27) = .769), and internal consistency ( α = .925). As for concurrent validity, the English VIS items significantly correlated with the subscale and total scores of the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ), with r values ranging from .23 (verbal aggression) to .72 (physical aggression).…”

“…The research question guiding this study is whether the VIS-ES is suitable for measuring VIS in the Spanish population. The hypotheses that guided the current study were that the one factor structure reported by previous analyses would be maintained (McKenzie et al, 2021;Murray et al, 2018), that this structure would stay invariant among women and men, that the reliability will be acceptable, and that the VIS-ES score will correlate positively with aggressive behaviors.…”

Validation of an Extended Violent Ideations Scale to Measure Both Non-Sexual and Sexual Violent Ideations (The VIS-X)

“…The VIS showed unidimensionality, minor measurement differences across gender and showed a predictive relation to criminal violence. The scale was also translated and validated in English by McKenzie, et al (2018) in a sample of 116 Englishspeaking adults.…”

Validation of an Extended Violent Ideations Scale to measure both non-sexual and sexual violent ideations (The VIS-X)

“…The VIS showed unidimensionality, minor measurement differences across gender and showed a predictive PREPRINT -Validation of an Extended Violent Ideations Scale (The VIS-X) 4 relation to criminal violence. The scale was also translated and validated in English by McKenzie, et al (2018) in a sample of 116 English-speaking adults.…”