Covid-19 Research

Original Article

Developing the Ibn-e-Sina University Mirpurkhas Scale of Affective Domain (ISUMSAD) A Pilot Study

Journal of Biomedical Research & Environmental Sciences article abstract with citation details, DOI, publication dates, subject areas, full text links, and references.

View DOI Submit Manuscript

Article Details

Publication record, authors, dates, abstract, and full text access.

Open Access
Article Type Original Article
Subject General Science
OCLC JBRES Record
Syed Razi Muhammad* and Krishna Gopal Rampal
Issue: Volume6-Issue7
Pages: 896-913
Received: 2025-07-07
Accepted: 2025-07-16
Published: 2025-07-17

Abstract

The Ibn-e-Sina University Mirpurkhas Scale of Affective Domain (ISUMSAD) is a newly developed instrument designed to measure the affective domain within health professions education and patient care. A pilot study was conducted to create a questionnaire with an optimal number of items, examining the measurement properties, underlying components, and latent variable structure of ISUMSAD. This initiative aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficiency of a larger research project. The items encompass all five levels of the affective domain (Receiving, Responding, Valuing, Organizing, and Characterizing).


Fifty students from the Muhammad Institute of Physiotherapy & Rehabilitation Sciences (MIPRS), a constituent college of Ibn-e-Sina University Mirpurkhas (ISUM), completed ten initial scales comprising 217 affective domain items. These scales were selected by a five-member committee of medical education experts. We used low Corrected Item-Total Correlation, high Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted, low factor loadings and finally low communalities to identify items for removal, until the items were gradually reduced to 12, forming the finalized ISUMSAD scale. The same 50 students then rated these 12 items on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree), yielding total scores ranging from 12 to 84 per student.


The sample’s mean ISUMSAD score was 60.86/84 (SD = 12.7). Item-total correlations were positive, with Cronbach’s α = 0.92 and KMO = 0.855. Principal Component Analysis revealed two factors. Factor 1 was named “Empathy & Communication” and Factor 2 was named “Skills & Respect”.

FullText HTML FullText PDF DOI: 10.37871/jbres2145 Crossmark

Certificate of Publication

Certificate of Publication

Copyright

© 2025 Muhammad SR, et al., Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 Creative CommonsAttribution

How to cite this article

Muhammad SR, Rampal KG. Developing the Ibn-e-Sina University Mirpurkhas Scale of Affective Domain (ISUMSAD): A Pilot Study. J Biomed Res Environ Sci. 2025 Jul 17; 6(7): 896-913. doi: 10.37871/jbres2145, Article ID: JBRES2145, Available at: https://www.jelsciences.com/articles/jbres2145.pdf

Subject area(s)

Educational Science

References

  1. Krathwohl DR, Bloom BS, Masia BB. Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook II: The affective domain. New York. Morshead RW, editor. Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook II: Affective domain. Studies in Philosophy and Education. 1965;4:164-170.
  2. Gaufberg E, Hodges B. Humanism, compassion and the call to caring. Med Educ. 2016 Mar;50(3):264-6. doi: 10.1111/medu.12961. PMID: 26896006.
  3. Shanafelt TD, West CP, Dyrbye LN, Trockel M, Tutty M, Wang H, Carlasare LE, Sinsky C. Changes in Burnout and Satisfaction With Work-Life Integration in Physicians During the First 2 Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Mayo Clin Proc. 2022 Dec;97(12):2248-2258. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2022.09.002. Epub 2022 Sep 14. PMID: 36229269; PMCID: PMC9472795.
  4. Neumann JA, Forsyth D. Teaching in the affective domain for institutional values. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2008 Jun;39(6):248-52; quiz 253-4, 280. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20080601-07. PMID: 18557282.
  5. Derksen F, Bensing J, Lagro-Janssen A. Effectiveness of empathy in general practice: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2013 Jan;63(606):e76-84. doi: 10.3399/bjgp13X660814. PMID: 23336477; PMCID: PMC3529296.
  6. Hojat M, Louis DZ, Markham FW, Wender R, Rabinowitz C, Gonnella JS. Physicians' empathy and clinical outcomes for diabetic patients. Acad Med. 2011 Mar;86(3):359-64. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182086fe1. PMID: 21248604.
  7. SR Muhammad. Establishing the construct validity and internal consistency for urdu version of Jefferson Scale of Empathy-S (JSE-S). Journal of Psychiatry and Psychiatric Disorders. 2024;8(4).
  8. Syed Aun Muhammad, Syed Razi Muhammad. Empathy unlocked: Enhancing emotional intelligence skills using communication workshop for undergraduates medical and dental students. JMMC. 2024;15(1):54-61.
  9. McLeod S. Case study research method in psychology. Simply Psychology. 2008.
  10. Canlas. AOL-2-Mod-4. Scribd. 2025.
  11. Andersen NB, O’Neill L, Gormsen LK, Hvidberg L, Morcke AM. A validation study of the psychometric properties of the Groningen reflection ability scale. BMC Medical Education. 2014;14(1).
  12. Aukes LC, Geertsma J, Cohen-Schotanus J, Zwierstra RP, Slaets JP. The development of a scale to measure personal reflection in medical practice and education. Med Teach. 2007 Mar;29(2-3):177-82. doi: 10.1080/01421590701299272. PMID: 17701630.
  13. Hojat M, Mangione S, Nasca TJ, Cohen MJM, Gonnella JS, Erdmann JB. The jefferson scale of physician empathy: development and preliminary psychometric data. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2001;61(2):349-365.
  14. Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue).
  15. Amirhajlou L, Bidari A, Alipour F, Yaseri M, Vaziri S, Rezai M, Tavakoli N, Farsi D, Yasinzadeh MR, Mosaddegh R, Hashemi A. Validity, reliability and acceptability of Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) for emergency medicine residency training. J Med Ethics Hist Med. 2019 Oct 15;12:12. doi: 10.18502/jmehm.v12i12.1641. PMID: 32328225; PMCID: PMC7166245.
  16. Perceived Choice and Awareness of Self Scale (PCASS) formerly known as the Self-Determination.
  17. Smith TW, Fischer R, Vignoles VL, Bond MH. Understanding social psychology across cultures: Engaging with others in a changing world. Sage Publications. 2003.
  18. Kim Bryan SK, Sehee Hong. A psychometric revision of the Asian values scale using the rasch model. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 2004;37:15-27.
  19. Brett AM, Smith ML, Price EA, Huitt WG. Affective domain overview of the Affective Domain. 2012.
  20. Kasai H, Ito S, Tajima H, Takahashi Y, Sakurai Y, Kawata N, Sugiyama H, Asahina M, Sakai I, Tatsumi K. The positive effect of student-oriented clinical clerkship rounds employing role-play and peer review on the clinical performance and professionalism of clerkship students. Med Teach. 2020 Jan;42(1):73-78. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2019.1656330. Epub 2019 Aug 31. PMID: 31475589.
  21. Sheldon KM, Cheng C, Hilpert J. Understanding well-being and optimal functioning: Applying the Multilevel Personality in Context (MPIC) Model. Psychological Inquiry. 2011;22(1):1-16.
  22. Blendon RJ, Benson JM, Hero JO. Public trust in physicians--U.S. medicine in international perspective. N Engl J Med. 2014 Oct 23;371(17):1570-2. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1407373. PMID: 25337746.
  23. Perlis RH, Ognyanova K, Uslu A, Lunz Trujillo K, Santillana M, Druckman JN, Baum MA, Lazer D. Trust in Physicians and Hospitals During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a 50-State Survey of US Adults. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jul 1;7(7):e2424984. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.24984. PMID: 39083270; PMCID: PMC11292455.
  24. Thom DH, Hall MA, Pawlson LG. Measuring patients' trust in physicians when assessing quality of care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jul-Aug;23(4):124-32. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.4.124. PMID: 15318572.
  25. 73rd World health assembly agenda item 3: COVID-19 pandemic response. World Medical Association. 2020.
  26. Chandra S, Ward P, Mohammadnezhad M. Investigating Patient Trust in Doctors: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Out-Patient Departments in Fiji. Int Q Community Health Educ. 2021 Jul;41(4):369-377. doi: 10.1177/0272684X20967602. Epub 2020 Oct 21. PMID: 33086937.
  27. Crawshaw R, Rogers DE, Pellegrino ED, Bulger RJ, Lundberg GD, Bristow LR, Cassel CK, Barondess JA. Patient-physician covenant. JAMA. 1995 May 17;273(19):1553. PMID: 7739086.
  28. Mechanic D, Meyer S. Concepts of trust among patients with serious illness. Soc Sci Med. 2000 Sep;51(5):657-68. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00014-9. PMID: 10975226.
  29. Thom DH, Campbell B. Patient-physician trust: an exploratory study. J Fam Pract. 1997 Feb;44(2):169-76. PMID: 9040520.
  30. Keating NL, Gandhi TK, Orav EJ, Bates DW, Ayanian JZ. Patient characteristics and experiences associated with trust in specialist physicians. Arch Intern Med. 2004 May 10;164(9):1015-20. doi: 10.1001/archinte.164.9.1015. PMID: 15136312.
  31. Lupton D. Your life in their hands: Trust and the medical encounter. Health and the Sociology of Emotions. Oxford: Blackwell. 1996.
  32. Damodaran AK, Jones P, Shulruf B. Trust and risk pitfalls in medical education: A qualitative study of clinical teachers. Med Teach. 2021 Nov;43(11):1309-1316. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1944613. Epub 2021 Jul 19. PMID: 34280316.
  33. Nadler JT, Weston R, Voyles EC. Stuck in the middle: the use and interpretation of mid-points in items on questionnaires. J Gen Psychol. 2015;142(2):71-89. doi: 10.1080/00221309.2014.994590. PMID: 25832738.
  34. Chyung SYY, Barkin JR, Shamsy JA. Evidence-based survey design: The use of negatively worded items in surveys. Performance Improvement. 2018;57(3):16-25.
  35. Cronbach L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychomerika. 1951;16:297-334.
  36. Taber KS. The use of cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education. 2017;48(6):1273-1296.
  37. Collins LM. Research Design and Methods. Encyclopedia of Gerontology. 2007;2(2):433-442.
  38. Tavakol M, Wetzel A. Factor Analysis: a means for theory and instrument development in support of construct validity. Int J Med Educ. 2020 Nov 6;11:245-247. doi: 10.5116/ijme.5f96.0f4a. PMID: 33170146; PMCID: PMC7883798.
  39. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974;39(1):31-36.
  40. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Allyn & Bacon; 2007.
  41. Brown JD. Statistics corner. Questions and answers about language testing statistics: Principal components analysis and exploratory factor analysis: Definitions, differences, and choices. Shiken: JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter. 2009;13(1):26-30.
  42. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 6th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc; 2013.
  43. What is inter-item reliability? World Supporter. 2019.
  44. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:53-55.
  45. Piedmont RL, Hyland ME. Inter-item correlation frequency distribution analysis: A method for evaluating scale dimensionality. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1993;53(2):369-378.
Publish with JBRES — Peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary Open Access with rapid review, DOI, and global visibility.
Double-Blind CrossRef DOI Discoverable
Submit Manuscript Membership