The Korean Version of the Academic Cyberincivility Assessment Questionnaire for Nursing Students in South Korea: Validity and Reliability Study
Minjoo Hong,Jennie C De Gagne,Hyewon Shin,Suhye Kwon,Gum-Hee Choi
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/15668
2020-05-05
Abstract:Background: Cybercivility, the practice of what to say and how to say it in online environments, encourages individuals to treat each other with respect. However, the anonymity of online communities may lead some individuals to behave in ways that violate social and cultural norms. These individuals treat others with a lack of regard and even bully others in faceless online confrontations. This practice of cyberincivility can be found across the internet, on commercial sites, and in schools offering online courses. Research on cybercivility and cyberincivility has increased in the United States, where instruments have been developed to measure the impact of cyberincivility in health profession education. However, there is no available instrument that measures nursing students' online behaviors in South Korea. Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a Korean version of the Academic Cyberincivility Assessment Questionnaire developed in the United States. Methods: Data were collected from 213 nursing students in three South Korean colleges. The Academic Cyberincivility Assessment Questionnaire developed by De Gagne and colleagues was adapted to measure students' knowledge of cybercivility, and their experiences with and acceptability of cyberincivility. Content validity was tested using the content validity index (CVI). Criterion validity was tested using the digital citizenship scale. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach alpha. The goodness-of-fit of construct validity was determined through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Results: The CVI was 0.8 or higher for all items. Kuder-Richardson Formula 20, measuring reliability of the knowledge scale, was 0.22 and Cronbach alpha, measuring reliability of the experience scale, was .96. The goodness-of-fit of the model was Chi square=5568.63 (P<.001), the comparative fit index (CFI) was 0.92, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.08, which satisfied the criteria. The reliability of the acceptability scale was .96, and the goodness-of-fit indices satisfied the criteria (minimum Chi square/df=2.34, Tucker-Lewis Index =0.92, incremental fit index=0.93, root mean square residual=0.05, CFI=0.93, and RMSEA=0.08). Conclusions: This study extended and reevaluated the US version of cybercivility scales in a culturally distinct context. The three dimensions of cybercivility include knowledge, experience, and acceptability. Acceptability is well-validated as a dimension, whereas the knowledge dimension requires reexamination for application to Koreans. A revision of the instrument is needed that considers the cultural differences between South Korea and the United States. This paper calls for more attention to be paid to contextualized cybercivility scales among health professions in countries outside the United States.