Caitlin M. Pinciotti, PhD

Assistant Professor



Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences

Baylor College of Medicine



Psychometric Properties of the Institutional Betrayal Questionnaire, Version 2: Evidence for a Two-Factor Model


Journal article


A. Reffi, Caitlin M. Pinciotti, H. Orcutt
Journal of interpersonal violence, 2018

Semantic Scholar DOI PubMed
Cite

Cite

APA   Click to copy
Reffi, A., Pinciotti, C. M., & Orcutt, H. (2018). Psychometric Properties of the Institutional Betrayal Questionnaire, Version 2: Evidence for a Two-Factor Model. Journal of Interpersonal Violence.


Chicago/Turabian   Click to copy
Reffi, A., Caitlin M. Pinciotti, and H. Orcutt. “Psychometric Properties of the Institutional Betrayal Questionnaire, Version 2: Evidence for a Two-Factor Model.” Journal of interpersonal violence (2018).


MLA   Click to copy
Reffi, A., et al. “Psychometric Properties of the Institutional Betrayal Questionnaire, Version 2: Evidence for a Two-Factor Model.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2018.


BibTeX   Click to copy

@article{a2018a,
  title = {Psychometric Properties of the Institutional Betrayal Questionnaire, Version 2: Evidence for a Two-Factor Model},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Journal of interpersonal violence},
  author = {Reffi, A. and Pinciotti, Caitlin M. and Orcutt, H.}
}

Abstract

Institutional betrayal reflects the failings of a trusted institution to prevent or respond appropriately to negative experiences. Following sexual assault, survivors who encounter institutional betrayal may experience greater distress and poorer functioning. The current study sought to assess the construct validity of the Institutional Betrayal Questionnaire, Version 2 (IBQ.2) and evaluate its factor structure. Survivors of sexual assault (N = 426) were recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk and completed various questionnaires related to mental health, disclosure and assault characteristics, world beliefs, and rape myth adherence. The IBQ.2 demonstrated convergent validity with disclosure to formal support providers, assault severity, turning against reactions, and beliefs about self-control, and evidenced discriminant validity with disclosure timing, rape myth adherence, and beliefs about randomness and controllability of outcomes. Notably, the IBQ.2 was unrelated to measures of distress, including symptoms of stress, depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder, providing mixed evidence for the IBQ.2’s construct validity. Confirmatory factor analyses failed to replicate the single-factor model of institutional betrayal found in a previous study, and, instead, suggested a two-factor structure of the IBQ.2 that delineates between the promotion of and response to sexual victimization. Post hoc analyses revealed that only one of the two factors (Response to Sexual Victimization) evidenced convergent and discriminant validity largely consistent with the single-factor model. The novelty of these relationships and factor structure of the IBQ.2 found in the current study warrants replication in future research.


Share



Follow this website


You need to create an Owlstown account to follow this website.


Sign up

Already an Owlstown member?

Log in