TABLE 1.
Item statistics and factor loadings of lack of goal clarity scale
| # | Item | Factor loadings a | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | 1 | 2 | r it b | Cronbach's α if item deleted | ||
| 1 | [4] It is clear to me what the focus of my treatment is c | 2.88 | 1.52 | .68 | −.18 | .62 | .76 |
| 2 | [7] I have the feeling there is no clear purpose in my treatment | 3.06 | 1.75 | .73 | −.13 | .65 | .75 |
| 3 | [12] I find it difficult to indicate what the desired result of my treatment is | 3.92 | 1.77 | .58 | .17 | .49 | .77 |
| 4 | [16] The goal of the treatment tends to change from time to time | 3.71 | 1.55 | .54 | .29 | .44 | .77 |
| 5 | [22] I understand the connecting thread in my treatment c | 3.06 | 1.54 | .68 | −.07 | .60 | .76 |
| 6 | [25] During conversations with my therapist I'd prefer to discuss everything that is on my mind | 5.14 | 1.46 | .06 | .53 | −.04 | .82 |
| 7 | [29] For a long time now my treatment has not focused on the problems for which I came into treatment at the time | 3.13 | 1.64 | .53 | .10 | .46 | .77 |
| 8 | [33] The therapist and I follow a predefined plan in the treatment c | 3.46 | 1.50 | .51 | −.15 | .47 | .77 |
| 9 | [37] It is unclear to me what I would like to have achieved exactly at the end of the treatment | 3.43 | 1.75 | .57 | .09 | .49 | .77 |
| 10 | [41] What we discuss during the treatment session depends on what occupies me the most at that moment | 5.33 | 1.23 | .05 | .44 | −.02 | .81 |
| 11 | [45] It is more and more unclear to me what the focus of my treatment is | 3.10 | 1.61 | .81 | .00 | .71 | .74 |
Note: N = 742. The original questionnaire in the current study was in Dutch. The English adaptation of the items in the table is based on a “forward‐and‐backward” translation procedure by a professional translation office including a native English speaker. In addition, the items in the current study were part of the original 54‐item questionnaire measuring patients' care dependency, see footnote in Geurtzen et al. (2018). The numbers between brackets show the original numbering of these items. All items were rated on a 1‐ to 7‐point Likert scales from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree).
Factor loadings based on Principal Axis Factoring with Promax rotation. Factor loadings over .32 appear in boldface. The first factor explained 37.8% of the variance, and the second factor explained 12.2% of the variance.
r it = part‐whole corrected item‐total correlation.
Item reversed scored.