Whose responsibility? Part 1 of 2: A scale to assess how stakeholders apportion responsibilities for addressing the needs of persons with mental health problems

Table 6 Internal consistency for different language groups from the larger study

Language	Rater	Sample	N	No of items	Pair	Cronbach’s α
English	Patient	Montreal	40	7	Government-Patient	0.885
			41	7	Government-Family	0.916
			41	7	Family-Patient	0.862
		Chennai	33	7	Government-Patient	0.809
			33	7	Government-Family	0.878
			33	7	Family-Patient	0.823
	Family	Montreal	23	7	Government-Patient	0.895
			23	7	Government-Family	0.871
			20	7	Family-Patient	0.89
		Chennai*	5	7	Government-Patient	0.786
			5	7	Government-Family	0.889
			5	7	Family-Patient	0.478
French	Patient	Montreal	27	7	Government-Patient	0.948
			26	7	Government-Family	0.924
			26	7	Family-Patient	0.90
	Family	Montreal	37	7	Government-Patient	0.898
			37	7	Government-Family	0.892
			35	7	Family-Patient	0.893
Tamil	Patient	Chennai	129	7	Government-Patient	0.756
			130	7	Government-Family	0.80
			129	7	Family-Patient	0.799
	Family	Chennai	159	7	Government-Patient	0.75
			159	7	Government-Family	0.746
			159	7	Family-Patient	0.808

All Cronbach’s α values were statistically significant (p < 0.05)
*Cronbach’s alpha estimates need to be interpreted with caution as it was based on data from only 5 participants. Only 5 family members responded to the English version of the WRS in Chennai, with the rest opting for the Tamil version

ISSN: 1752-4458