1.0
Cite Score 2025
SJR: 0.129 / SNIP: 0.140
JMERC
Owner
Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC) is the owner of IJWPH.
Volume 18, Issue 3 (2026)
3 2026, 18(3): 1001-1009 |
Back to browse issues page
Request Type:
History
Received: 2026/07/22 | Accepted: 2026/09/2 | Published: 2026/09/8
Received: 2026/07/22 | Accepted: 2026/09/2 | Published: 2026/09/8
How to cite this article
Ojaghizadeh H, Ghaemi A, Basharpoor S. Examining the Psychological Characteristics of the Psychosocial Crisis of Risk Perception Among Firefighters. 3 2026; 18 (3) :1001-1009
URL: http://ijwph.daneshafarand.org/article-3-87216-en.html
URL: http://ijwph.daneshafarand.org/article-3-87216-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abstract (17 Views)
Objective: First responders, particularly firefighters, are at the frontline of critical incident exposure and require psychometrically robust instruments to assess risk appraisal and related psychosocial consequences. The present study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties and validate the Perceived Psychosocial Risk Scale (adapted from Altanlar et al., 2025) in a sample of firefighters.
Method: In this descriptive-correlational study, a sample of 200 firefighters was selected via purposive sampling. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and convergent validity in SPSS (Version 27) and AMOS (Version 24) using the maximum likelihood (ML) estimator.
Results: Prior to model estimation, univariate normality was confirmed, with skewness and kurtosis values for all items falling within ±2. The EFA and subsequent CFA supported a robust two-factor measurement model comprising 6 items: Disaster experience and its consequences and Preventive and coping measures. All standardized factor loadings were statistically significant (p<0.001). The measurement model demonstrated an optimal fit to the empirical data: χ2=14.80, χ2/df=1.85, RMSEA=0.065, NFI=0.96, CFI=0.98, IFI=0.98, GFI=0.97, and AGFI=0.92. Reliability assessment showed high internal consistency for the total scale, with Cronbach’s alpha (α=0.85) and McDonald’s omega (ω=0.86). Convergent validity and construct reliability were established for both dimensions: Disaster experience and its consequences (AVE=0.526, CR=0.788) and Preventive and coping measures (AVE=0.516, CR=0.780).
Conclusion: The 6-item, two-factor structure of the scale is a reliable, valid, and parsimonious instrument for evaluating psychosocial outcomes and disaster risk management among firefighters. Crisis management organizations and mental health practitioners can utilize this standardized measure for screening, risk assessment, and designing evidence-based preventive and resilience-building interventions.
Method: In this descriptive-correlational study, a sample of 200 firefighters was selected via purposive sampling. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and convergent validity in SPSS (Version 27) and AMOS (Version 24) using the maximum likelihood (ML) estimator.
Results: Prior to model estimation, univariate normality was confirmed, with skewness and kurtosis values for all items falling within ±2. The EFA and subsequent CFA supported a robust two-factor measurement model comprising 6 items: Disaster experience and its consequences and Preventive and coping measures. All standardized factor loadings were statistically significant (p<0.001). The measurement model demonstrated an optimal fit to the empirical data: χ2=14.80, χ2/df=1.85, RMSEA=0.065, NFI=0.96, CFI=0.98, IFI=0.98, GFI=0.97, and AGFI=0.92. Reliability assessment showed high internal consistency for the total scale, with Cronbach’s alpha (α=0.85) and McDonald’s omega (ω=0.86). Convergent validity and construct reliability were established for both dimensions: Disaster experience and its consequences (AVE=0.526, CR=0.788) and Preventive and coping measures (AVE=0.516, CR=0.780).
Conclusion: The 6-item, two-factor structure of the scale is a reliable, valid, and parsimonious instrument for evaluating psychosocial outcomes and disaster risk management among firefighters. Crisis management organizations and mental health practitioners can utilize this standardized measure for screening, risk assessment, and designing evidence-based preventive and resilience-building interventions.