Health Policy and Management (보건행정학회지)

Korean Academy of Health Policy and Management (한국보건행정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development of Public Health Center Image Scale

보건소 이미지 척도 개발

  • 이인영 (강북구 보건소) ;
  • 김은미 (구리시 보건소) ;
  • 배상수 (한림대학교 의과대학 한림사회의학연구소)
  • Received : 2013.09.25
  • Accepted : 2013.11.05
  • Published : 2013.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: This study was aim to identify the specific words and to develop the scale for the public health center (PHC) image. Methods: We collected 824 words from the previous studies and by open questions and reduced them by 77 words, then which were rated properly by 355 citizens of Seoul. We examined explanatory factor analysis for 69 words, and examined content validity test and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for the image structures (4 factors and 16 words). And then we developed the image questionnaire using them through council. We conducted a survey and retested the PHC image scales as the measuring tool targeting 2,000 persons, and compared the inexperience and experience persons for PHC usage. Results: The image structures were consisted of 4 factors and 16 words such as 'trustworthiness' (warm, exemplary, faithful, service-mindedness, beneficial to health), 'fairness' (honesty, clear, consistent, ruled), 'development possibility' (changing, goal-directed, developmental, propulsive), and 'flexibility' (not authoritative, not perfunctory, not rigid) in total. Cronbach's ${\alpha}$ values of all factors were above 0.7. As a result of CFA, model fit indexes yielded satisfactory results (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] 0.049, goodness of fit index [GFI] 0.937, and adjusted goodness of fit index [AGFI] 0.912). According to the result of retest for measuring tool by using other samples, Cronbach's ${\alpha}$ values were above 0.8, and model fit indexes yielded satisfactory results (RMSEA 0.059, GFI 0.952, AGFI 0.933). RMSEAs of the inexperiences and the experiences were each 0.59, 0.68. Conclusion: A reliable, valid, and generalizable scale was created for PHC image.

Keywords

References

  1. Aaker JL. Dimensions of brand personality. J Mark Res 1997;34:347-56. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151897
  2. Belt JA, Paolillo GP. The influence of corporate image and specificity of candidate qualifications on response to recruitment advertisement. J Manag 1982;8(1):105-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638200800107
  3. Bentler PM. Comparative fix Indexes in structural model. Psychol Bull 1990; 107(2):238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
  4. Bernstein D. Company, image & reality: a critique of corporate communications. London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Ltd.; 1984.
  5. Cho EH. Scale development study on government brand image. Korean Policy Sci Bull 2004;8(4):205-226.
  6. Choe SB, Park HS, Chun R. The study of the relationship between the image reputation and the customer satisfaction of the government agency. Korean Public Admin Q 2007;19(4):955-985.
  7. Davies G, Chun R. Gaps between the internal and external perceptions of the corporate brand. Corp Reput Review 2002;5(2-3):144-158. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540171
  8. Davies G, Chun R, da Silva RV. The personification metaphor as a measurement approach for corporate reputation. Corp Reput Rev 2001;4(2):113-127. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540137
  9. Ha BJ. Study of corporate image factors affecting purchasing intention. Advert Res 1999;3:42-51.
  10. Han DW. Ratings of usability, likability, and social desirability of personality-trait words. Korean J Psychol 1992;11(1):147-171.
  11. Keith D. Nation branding: the strategic management of nation brand. Kim YK, translator. Paju: Nanam Publisher; 2009.
  12. Kwon DS. Development of lifelong education institution image scale and comparison of image among them. Korean J Lifelong Educ 2006;12(3):125-148.
  13. Kim CA, Jo SS, Shin HC. The development of measurement scale to assess the government agency image: focusing on the Ministry of Educational and Human Resources Development. Advert Res 2006;73:43-60.
  14. Lee JH. Marketing scoring. Seoul: Adbook Publisher; 2005.
  15. Lee SM. Factor analysis I. Seoul: Hakjisa Publisher; 1995.
  16. Lim TY, Kang GB. C.I.P study for the image enhancement of public institutions: focused image investigation for Jinhae C.I.P. Korean J Vis Des Forum 1998;3:28-39.
  17. O MY, Park JM, Jang JH. A study on factors of affecting country image. Korean J Advert 2003;14(1):149-177.
  18. Park YC. Determinants of public organizational image: the case of local public enterprise. Korean Soc Admin Res 2004;15(3):1-21.
  19. Park HS, Choe SB, Chun R, editors. The brand image and identity of government organization, and the relation of customer satisfaction measurement. Proceedings of Autumn Academic Conference of Korean Association of Public Administration; 2006 Nov; Seoul, Korea. Seoul: Korean Association of Public Administration; 2006.
  20. Shin HC, Jo SS, Kim CA. The development of measurement scale to assess the government agency image. Korean J Advert Public Relat 2008;10(1): 268-291.
  21. Tak JG. Psychologic testing: understanding of development and evaluation. 2nd ed. Seoul: Hakjisa publisher; 1996.
  22. Winters LC. The effects of brand advertising on company image: implications for corporate advertising. J Advert Res 1986;26:5-56.
  23. Yoo TY. Exploratory study on factor structure of trait adjectives describing corporate image. Korean J Psychol 1994;7(1):29-54.
  24. Yoo TY, Lee JG. Development of model for measurement of college image and comparison of image between colleges. Korean J Psychol 1997;10(2): 31-54.