Associate Professor Elizabeth Bowen, PhD Candidate Andrew Irish, PhD students Charles LaBarre, Nicole Capozziello, and colleagues publish article, "Qualitative insights in item development for a comprehensive and inclusive measure of recovery capital"

Published May 16, 2022

Print

Elizabeth Bowen

Elizabeth Bowen.

Andrew Irish

Andrew Irish.

Charles LaBarre

Charles LaBarre.

Nicole Capozziello

Nicole Capozziello.

Thomas Nochajski

Thomas Nochajski.

Kudos to Associate Professor Elizabeth Bowen, PhD Candidate Andrew Irish, PhD student Charles LaBarre, PhD student Nicole Capozziello, Emeritus Research Professor Thomas Nochajski and colleagues publish article, "Qualitative insights in item development for a comprehensive and inclusive measure of recovery capital" in the journal Addiction Research & Theory.

Bowen, E., Irish, A., LaBarre, C., Capozziello, N., Nochajski, T., & Granfield, R. (2022). Qualitative insights in item development for a comprehensive and inclusive measure of recovery capital. Addiction Research & Theory.

Abstract

Background

Item specification is foundational to measurement development but rarely reported in depth. We address this gap by explicating our use of qualitative methods to ground and develop items for a new recovery capital measure, the Multidimensional Inventory of Recovery Capital.

Method

We recruited a diverse sample of service providers (n = 9) and people in recovery from alcohol problems (n = 23) to provide feedback on an item pool assessing social, human, physical, community, and cultural capital. Using applied qualitative analysis, we coded findings from interviews and focus groups and made final decisions by consensus regarding item elimination, retention, or revision. This process yielded a 49-item draft measure.

Results

Only nine items from an initial 90-item list were retained in their original form. Participant feedback guided item elimination, addition, and revision for linguistic or conceptual clarity. We detected little systematic variation in feedback based on income or race; however, there were stark divergences on particular items based on recovery pathway (i.e. 12-step versus other approaches).

Conclusions

The high degree of alteration to the item pool highlights the importance of establishing validity with respondents. Response variation based on recovery pathway suggests the need for broad heterogeneity in respondents. Measures that are sensitive, psychometrically sound, and aligned with theory are critical for advancing research on recovery capital and related disparities for diverse populations.