Health Education & Behavior

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by DeVellis, R. F.
Right arrow Articles by Voyce, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by DeVellis, R. F.
Right arrow Articles by Voyce, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Health Education & Behavior, Vol. 20, No. 2, 211-225 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/109019819302000213

Development and Validation of the Parent Health Locus of Control Scales

Robert F. DeVellis, PhD

Brenda McEvoy DeVellis, PhD

Lynn White Blanchard, PhD

Mary Lou Klotz, PhD

Kathryn Luchok, MA

Charlene Voyce, MPH

We describe the development and validation of the Parent Health Locus of Control (PHLOC) scales. Using factor analytic and item analytic methods, 30 items comprising six scales were extracted from a pool of 84 items. The individual scales correspond to beliefs in Child, Divine, Fate, Media, Parental, and Professional Influence over child health. Results were compared for six samples totalling 822 parents. Internal consistency reliabilities were above .70 for all scales with all samples. Test-retest correlations based on a separate sample were all above .60. Validity was assessed by means of a known groups strategy that made use of presumed differences among the six samples studied. The results generally agreed with predicted differences, offering good initial evidence of the validity for the PHLOC scales.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?