Original Article Korean J Child Stud 2016;37(3):95-110 http://dx.doi.org/10.5723/kjcs.2016.37.3.95 pissn: 1226-1688 eissn: 2234-408X The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on Multicultural Family Support Services Kyoung Eun Kim 1, Jung Ha Lim 2, Bogchong Kang 3, Eun Young Jo 4 Department of Child Welfare, Namseoul University, Cheonan, Korea 1 Department of Home Economics Education, Korea University, Seoul, Korea 2 Department of Multicultural Family Bureau, Korean Institute for Healthy Family, Seoul, Korea 3 Department of Home Ecology, Korea University, Seoul, Korea 4 1, 2, 3, 4 1, 2, 3, 4 Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop and examine the psychometric properties of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on multicultural family support services. Methods: The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire was designed to address key elements of the client s satisfaction with the services (i.e., family education, gender equality education, human right education, and social integration education) provided for multicultural families. The nationwide data were collected from 5,335 clients who participated in family education, 4,582 clients who participated in gender equality education, 4,777 clients who participated in human right education, and 5,547 clients who participated in social integration education at the multicultural family support center. Results: In general, the psychometric properties of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire were satisfactory. Specifically, social validity was supported by 13 professors and local multicultural service center professionals and construct validity was tested and confirmed using a series of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The split-half reliability and internal consistency of the questionnaire were also highly acceptable. Conclusion: The sound psychometric properties of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire indicates that the it can be a useful tool for evaluating client satisfaction with the services provided by multicultural family support centers. Keywords: multicultural family support service, Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, psychometric property, scale development 2000 (H.-W. Kim & Lim, 2012). Corresponding Author: Jung Ha Lim, Dept. of Home Economics Education, Korea University, 45, Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, Korea E-mail: jhlim@korea.ac.kr The Korean Association of Child Studies This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 96. 2006.. 21, 2008, 2015 217 (Ministry of Gender Equality and Family [MOGEF], 2015; Moon, Choi, & Seo, 2009). (H. Kim, 2015). (2016. 6. 2. 13536 ) 6 1,...,.,. (MOGEF, 2015).,,. 2012,,,,.,,,,. (MOGEF, 2012). 2014, 2015. 2015. 2014,,,,, 2015,,,,,. 2015,,,,..,,,.. (H.-W. Kim & Lim, 2012),,,.,,., (K. O. Kim, 2010).,.,.,,,.,,,, (Hwang, 2015).,.
97 The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire,.,. (Lee & Kim, 2013).. 2014,,,, ( ),,,,.. (Attkisson & Greenfield, 1996).,. (Kerssens & Yperen, 1996),. (client satisfaction) (Choi & Ryu, 2006). (McMurtry & Hudson, 2000; Reid & Gundlach, 1984), (Korean Institute for Healthy Family [KIHF], 2012). (Geron, 1998) (Kapp & Propp, 2002). (K. H. Park & Cheong, 2001)., (Song & Park, 2011)..,. (KIHF, 2012), 2012,,,,.. 2013.,., (,,, ) (, ) (K. E. Kim, Lim, Min, Kim, & Kang, 2013; KIHF, 2012). 2015, 2014. 2015.,
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 98.. 1? 2? 3? 연구대상및연구절차 2015 216. 2015. 2015.,,,,, 5.., 10..... ( 1 ) 1 2 3. 2. ( 2 ) 2 (Delphi technique). 13,. 10, 10, 10.,, 10 3,,,,,, 10 8, 10 2,.. 2015 1 ( ) 5 ( ),. ( 3 )..
99 The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire. 216. 2015.,. 2015 8 11,. 12. 20 216 6,431, 5,355, 4,582, 4,777, 5,547. Table 1. ( ).,. 자료분석,,., SPSS., Table 1 General Characteristics of Participants Gender Gender equality Human Social integration Family education education right education education (n = 5,355) (n = 4,582) (n = 4,777) (n = 5,547) f % f % f % f % Male 205 3.8 181 4.0 150 3.1 159 2.9 Female 5,150 96.2 4,401 96.0 4,627 96.9 5,388 97.1 Age (year) Under 20 19 0.4 14 0.3 15 0.3 17 0.3 20-29 2,085 38.9 1,865 40.7 1,938 40.6 2,182 39.3 30-39 2,153 40.2 1,809 39.5 1,905 39.9 2,250 40.6 Above 40 1,098 20.5 894 19.5 919 19.2 1,098 19.8 Nationality Korea 197 3.7 174 3.8 142 3.0 150 2.7 China 1,177 22.0 974 21.3 1,030 21.6 1,219 22.0 Vietnam 1,764 32.9 1,572 34.3 1,637 34.3 1,846 33.3 Philippine 827 15.4 743 16.2 775 16.2 882 15.9 Japan 383 7.2 277 6.0 300 6.3 408 7.4 Mongol 133 2.5 108 2.4 112 2.3 141 2.5 Thai 120 2.2 99 2.2 110 2.3 133 2.4 Uzbekistan 31 0.6 25 0.5 27 0.6 33 0.6 Cambodia 528 9.9 457 10.0 478 10.0 532 9.6 Russia 44 0.8 33 0.7 34 0.7 44 0.8 Nepal 74 1.4 55 1.2 59 1.2 79 1.4 Indonesia 29 0.5 25 0.5 28 0.6 35 0.6 Others 48 0.9 40 0.9 45 0.9 45 0.8
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 100. (n = 3,189), (n = 3,242)., (Exploratory Factor Analysis [EFA]). KMO, Barltett.. varimax.,,.,.,.,. PSAW Statistics 18 (IBM Co., Armonk, NY) AMOS 18.0 (IBM Co., Armonk, NY). 다문화가족지원센터사업별이용자만족도척도의구성 2015 (Attkisson & Greenfield, 1996; K. E. Kim et al., 2013; KIHF, 2012) 2015 1. 2 ( ) 2012, 2013, 2015 2. 3 2,, 10 13.,., 5 3.11-4.60. ( ). (M = 4.60, SD =.70). (. ; M = 2.63, SD = 1.06) 5 3.63-4.30.. (M = 4.30, SD =.82). (. ; M = 2.63, SD = 1.06) 5 3.50-4.45.. (M = 4.45, SD =.82).., 5. 1 ( [ ]. ), (. ), (. ) ( [ ]. ). (. ). 4 5. (5 ), (10 ), (10 ),
101 The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (9 ), (18 )., 4., ( ). (,,, ) ( ).,.,.,.,,,,,. 다문화가족지원센터사업별이용자만족도척도의타당도및신뢰도. 3. 진행과정만족도척도의타당도와신뢰도, 4.., 1 4.22 1 84.43%.. 5 Table 2., 266.39 ( p <.001), CFI, IFI.98.98, RMSEA.12. (Figure 1) (.95,.82). 5,,,, procedure Procedure.80.89 P1 e1.80.89 P2 e2.78 P3 e3.91.91.84 P4 e4.83 P5 e5 Figure 1. Confirmatory factor analysis for procedure. Table 2 Factor Loadings for the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on Procedure 4 The place is comfortable and clean..93 5 The place is easy to find because of its location..92 1 I had a full explanation of program in advance through the person in charge..92 2 The lecturer explained lucidly to me..91 3 I can use program whenever I want..91 Factor 1
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 102,., Cronbach α.95,.94. 교육효과만족도척도의타당도와신뢰도가족교육이용자만족도척도의타당도와신뢰도, 1 8.01 1 80.10%.. 10 Table 3., 1926.53 ( p <.001), CFI, IFI.94.94, RMSEA.12. CFI, TLI.90, RMSEA.10.,. 454.57 ( p <.001), CFI, IFI.98.98, RMSEA.07. (Figure 2) (.97,.78). Family family Family edu. edu. FE1.78 e1.81 FE2 e2.90 FE3 e3.89.90 FE4.81 e4 FE5.78 e5.85.73 FE6 e6.84.71 FE7 e7.85.72.86 FE8 e8.85 FE9 FE10.74.72 e9 e10 Figure 2. Confirmatory factor analysis for family education.,,,,., Cronbach α.97,.95. 성평등교육이용자만족도척도의타당도와신뢰도, 1 8.23 1 82.32%.,. Table 3 Factor Loadings for the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on Family Education Factor 1 9 (Respondents with at least a child) I am more capable of having a good understanding of my children..91 10 (Respondents with at least a child) I am more aware of how to put up a good behavior as a good parent..91 8 (Respondents with at least a child) I am more confident about raising and caring for my children..90 4 I began making efforts to have a better relationship with my family..90 2 I have a better understanding of my family..90 7 (Respondents with at least a child) I am more informed with ways to raise and care for my children..90 5 I am more informed about how to resolve any conflict or problems we face in our family..89 1 I am more aware of my role within the family..89 3 There s an increase dialogue between members of the family. 6 I have more respect and understanding for my spouse country s culture increase such as Lifestyle, Language, Food, etc. (for mother in law, had respect daughter in laws country s culture).87
103 The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire 10 Table 4., 1335.71 ( p =.001), CFI, IFI.95.95, RMSEA.12. CFI, TLI.90, RMSEA.10.,., 531.33 ( p <.001), CFI, IFI.98.98, RMSEA.07. (Figure 3) (.97, ).,,,,,., Cronbach α.98,.96. 인권교육이용자만족도척도의타당도와신뢰도, 1 7.37 1 81.91%, gender Gender equality edu. GEE1.90 GEE2.91.91 GEE3.91 GEE4.90 GEE5.90 GEE6.87 GEE7.85.82 GEE8.86 GEE9 GEE10.81 e1.82 e2.82 e3.82 e4.82 e5.81 e6.76 e7.72 e8.68 e9.75 e10 Figure 3. Confirmatory factor analysis for gender equality education.. 9 Table 5., 750.49 ( p <.001), CFI, IFI.97.97, RMSEA.09. (Figure 4) (.97,.80).,,,,, Table 4 Factor Loadings for the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on Gender Equality Education Factor 1 4 (To be) I realized that communication is very important tool between husbands and wives..92 6 (To be ) I began playing an active role in resolving conflicts with my spouse..92 5 (To be) It is helpful to understand and appreciate spouse country s culture..91 3 (To be) I realized the need to keep a good etiquette between each other as a husband and wife..91 7 I am more aware we are equal at home as a husband and wife..91 2 (To be) I can put myself in the position of my spouse..91 10 I got to know that the father is also responsible for raising and caring for the children as much as the mother does..91 1 (To be) I began making efforts to have a better relationship with my spouse..91 8 My idea of a separate role between a man s role and a woman s role decreases..89 9 I realized that house hold chores are not only a woman s role, but for all members in the family.
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 104 Table 5 Factor Loadings for the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on Human Rights Education Factor 1 6 I get to know I have a right of personal information and privacy protection..92 7 I get to know everyone has a freedom to express their opinion (expression)..92 5 I get to know we are equal regardless of race, sex and age etc..91 9 I get to know how to cope with domestic violence..91 8 I get to know what physical and mental abuse is..91 4 It is helpful to solve difficulties (problems) I experienced as a member of multicultural families..91 2 I am more confident living as a member of a multicultural families in Korea..90 3 I get to know information related with government support or regulation (e.g., law, tax, economy etc.).89 1 We have a better understanding of each other s culture. Right right Right edu. edu..72 RE1.85.76 RE2.87 e1 e2 RE3 RE4.77.77 e3 e4.90.81 RE5 e5.91.83 RE6 e6.90.81.89 RE7 e7.90 RE8 RE9.81 e8 e9 Figure 4. Confirmatory factor analysis for human right education.., Cronbach α.97,.96. 사회통합교육이용자만족도척도의타당도와신뢰도, 1 55.34%, 2 23.30%. (1 9.96, 2 4.19) 2 18. 78.64%, Table 6..40 Social social integ ration integration edu. edu. 1 1 Social social integ integration ration edu. edu. 2 2 SIE1 SIE2 SIE3 SIE4 SIE6 SIE7 SIE8 SIE10 SIE11 SIE12 SIE13 SIE14 SIE15 SIE16 SIE17 SIE18 Figure 5. Confirmatory factor analysis for social integration education.,.89.89.89.86.85.89.76.87.89.89.89.87.86 SIE5 SIE9.77.77.77.74.72.58.76.77.77.76.74 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8 e9 e10 e11 e12 e13 e14 e15 e16 e17 e18
105 The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire Table 6 Factor Loadings for the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on the Social Integration Education Factor 1 2 4 It is helpful to solve difficulties (problems) we are facing as married immigrants (multicultural families)..19 3 I feel comfort and relief from hardships in multicultural marriage..18 5 I have more confidence as a member of multicultural family..87.17 6 I am grateful for the help from other married immigrants (multicultural families)..87.19 2 I am more acquainted with other married immigrants (multicultural families)..87.17 9 I can participate actively in local community work..87.20 1 I can share and exchange information when I meet other married immigrants (multicultural families)..87.16 8 I can promote the history and culture of my country to others..85.20 7 I get to know about various cultures..85.19 12 I learned how to introduce myself in relation to job recruitment..16.89 14 I can learn what is basic etiquette at the work place..17.89 15 It is helpful to understand working environment..19.89 13 It is helpful to learn professional skills in relation to job recruitment..16 16 The fear of getting a job has been reduced..17 11 I was able to get the needed job information for me..17 17 This program has helped in increasing my confidence for finding a job based on what I have learned from my country..16.86 18 I get to know where and how can I get information about daily life (e.g., bank, district office, hospital etc.)..17.85 10 I know what vocation is suitable for me..39.73 2007.41 ( p <.001), CFI, IFI.97.97, RMSEA.07. (Figure 5) (.98,.76). 2,,,,.,,,.., Cronbach α.95,.96,.97..94,.95. 사업영역별만족도경향 Table 7. 1-5., (M = 4.20, SD =.76), (M = 4.19, SD =.78), (M = 4.18, SD =.78), (M = 4.13, SD =.64)., (M = 4.29, SD =.86), (M = 4.27, SD =.87), (M = 4.25, SD =.95), (M = 4.24, SD =.90). (M = 4.13, SD =.75), (M = 4.12, SD =.74) (M = 4.10, SD =.77), (M = 4.01, SD =.60)..,
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 106 Table 7 Means and Standard Deviations of Service Satisfaction Family education Gender equality education Human right education Social integration education (n = 5,355) (n = 4,582) (n = 4,777) (n= 5,547) Procedure 4.29 (.86) 4.24 (.90) 4.27 (.87) 4.25 (.95) Outcome of service 4.12 (.74) 4.13 (.75) 4.10 (.77) 4.01 (.60) Total 4.20 (.76) 4.18 (.78) 4.19 (.78) 4.13 (.64), (M = 4.36, SD =.90), (M = 4.35, SD =.91), (M = 4.32, SD =.91), (M = 4.24, SD =.96), (M = 4.19, SD = 1.00)., (M = 4.19, SD =.81), (M = 4.17, SD =.81). (M = 4.14, SD =.84) (M = 4.14, SD =.83), (M = 4.13, SD =.84), (M = 4.12, SD =.81), (M = 4.12, SD =.85), (M = 4.11, SD =.83). (M = 4.09, SD =.81), (M = 4.05, SD =.87)., (M = 4.31, SD =.92), (M = 4.30, SD =.92), (M = 4.25, SD =.94), (M = 4.17, SD =.99), (M = 4.16, SD = 1.02)., (M = 4.21, SD =.81), (M = 4.19, SD =.81), (M = 4.15, SD =.82). (M = 4.13, SD =.82) (M = 4.13, SD =.86), (M= 4.12, SD =.82), (M = 4.11, SD =.83), (M = 4.11, SD =.84). (M = 4.08, SD =.84), (M = 4.04, SD =.87)., (M = 4.33, SD =.90) (M = 4.33, SD =.91), (M = 4.28, SD =.92), (M = 4.22, SD =.95), (M = 4.21, SD =.98)., (M = 4.16, SD =.82), (M = 4.14, SD =.83), (M = 4.13, SD =.85), (M = 4.11, SD =.84). (M = 4.09, SD =.86) (M = 4.09, SD =.87), (M = 4.08, SD =.86), (M = 4.07, SD =.86), (M = 4.05, SD =.86)., (M = 4.28, SD =.96) (M = 4.28, SD =.97), (M = 4.25, SD =.98), (M = 4.22, SD = 1.00), (M = 4.21, SD = 1.01).,. (M = 4.11, SD =.80) (M = 4.11, SD =.81)
107 The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, (M = 4.10, SD =.81) (M = 4.10, SD =.81), (M = 4.09, SD =.82) (M = 4.09, SD =.83). (M = 4.08, SD =.81) (M = 4.08, SD =.81), (M = 4.08, SD =.81)., (M = 3.98, SD =.82), (M = 3.92, SD =.84), (M = 3, SD =.86). (M = 3.86, SD = ) (M = 3.86, SD =.94), (M = 3.84, SD = ) (M = 3.82, SD =.89). (M = 3.81, SD = ) (M = 3.81, SD = ). 2015..,, (Pascoe, 1983), (Kerssens & Yperen, 1996). (Reid & Gundlach, 1984)..,,,,, (,, ).,,,,.,,,,.,,,,.,.,,,,., 2015,,,,,,.,,., 2015 216 6,431 2015 5 4.20 (SD =.76), 5 4.18 (SD =.78), 5 4.19 (SD =.78), 5 4.13 (SD =.64).,,,,
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 108.,.,,,,.,,.. (Y. Park, 2013), (K. O. Kim, 2010),., 2015, 2015., (J. Y. Kim & Choi, 2011).,,,,,.,,. 2015.,. 2012-2014.,. (H. Kim, 2015).,,. 2015. 2015,.,,.,,. ( ),,.
109 The Development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire Notes This article was presented at the 2015 annual fall conference of the Korean Association of Child Studies. Conflict of Interest No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported. In English References Attkisson, C., & Greenfield, T. K. (1996). The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) Scales and the Service Satisfaction Scale-30 (SSS-30). In L. L. Sederer & B. Dickey (Eds.), Outcome assessment in clinical practice (pp. 120-127). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins. Geron, S. M. (1998). Assessing the satisfaction of older adults with long-term care services: Measurement and design challenges for social work. Research on Social Work Practice, 8(1), 103-119. doi:10.1177/104973159800800108 Kapp, S. A., & Propp, J. (2002). Client satisfaction methods: Input from parents with children in foster care. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 19(3), 227-245. doi: 10.1023/A:1015580015223 Kerssens, J., & Yperen, E. (1996). Patient s evaluation of dietetic care: testing a cognitive attitude approach. Patient Education and Counseling, 27(3), 217 226. doi:10.1016/0738-3991(95)00815-2 McMurtry, S. L., & Hudson, W. W. (2000). The Client Satisfaction Inventory: Results of an initial validation study. Research on Social Work Practice, 10(5), 644-663. Retrieved from http:// rsw.sagepub.com/content/10/5/644.short Pascoe. G. C. (1983). Patient satisfaction in primary health care: a literature review and analysis. Evaluation and Program Planning, 6(3-4), 185-210. doi: 10.1016/0149-7189(83)90002-2 Reid, P. N., & Gundlach, J. H. (1984). A scale for the measurement of consumer satisfaction with social services. Journal of Social Service Research, 7(1), 37-54. doi:10.1300/ J079v07n01_03 In Korean Choi, I. S., & Ryu. J. S. (2006). Community Welfare. Seoul, Korea: Seoul National University Press. Hwang, J.-M. (2015). Reconsidering domestic violence against marriage-migrant women in Korea: From vulnerability to human security. Journal of Korean Women's Studies, 31(4), 1-39. Retrieved form http://www.dbpia.co.kr.oca.korea. ac.kr/journal/articledetail/node06585690 Kim, H. (2015). The roles of multi-cultural family support centers for employment of marriage immigrants. Journal of the International Network for Korean Language and Culture, 12(2), 75-95. doi:10.15652/ink.2015.12.2.075 Kim, H.-W., & Lim, C.-H. (2012). A study on the influence of multicultural family support services on the marital efficacy of marriage migrant women. Korean Journal of Family Welfare, 17(3), 27-53. Retrieved from http:// kiss.kstudy.com.oca.korea.ac.kr/journal/thesis_name. asp?tname=kiss2002&key=3104414 Kim, J. Y., & Choi, H.-S. (2011). A study on violation of human right of international marriage migrant women. Seoul: Korean Institute of Criminology. Kim, K. E., Lim, J., Min, S. H., Kim, L. J., & Kang, B. C. (2013). The development and validation of a client satisfaction questionnaire on the multicultural family support service. The Korean Journal of the Human Development, 20(3), 119-142. Retrieved from http://www.newnonmun.com.oca. korea.ac.kr/article=59465 Kim, K. O. (2010). A study on the influence factors to social integration of foreign wives (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Mokpo National University, Muan, Korea. Korean Institute for Healthy Family. (2012). The development of a Client Satisfaction Questionnaire on the Multicultural Family Support Service. Seoul: Korean Institute for Healthy Family. Lee, S.-J., & Kim, A. (2013). Effects of multicultural support centers on empowerment for marriage migrant women. Family and Culture, 25(2), 234-269. Retrieved from http:// scholar.dkyobobook.co.kr.oca.korea.ac.kr/searchdetail. laf?barcode=4010023612991 Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. (2012). Guidelines for Multicultural Family Support Center in 2012. Retrieved from http://www.mogef.go.kr/korea/view/policyguide/ policyguide06_09_01.jsp?func=view¤tpage=6&key_ type=&key=&search_start_date=&search_end_ date=&class_id=0&idx=641740 Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. (2015). Guidelines for Multicultural Family Support Center in 2015 (Publication No. 11-1383000-000250-10). Retrieved from http://www. mogef.go.kr/korea/view/policyguide/policyguide06_09_02. jsp?func=view¤tpage=0&key_type=&key=&search_ start_date=&search_end_date=&class_id=0&idx=695715 Moon, H.-J., Choi, Y. K., & Seo, S.-J. (2009). Children in Korean Multi-cultural Families. Korean Journal of Child Studies,
Kim, Lim, Kang, and Jo 110 30(6), 85-97. Retrieved from http://www.childstudies.org/ journal/view.php?number=3211 Park, K. H., & Cheong, Y. S. (2001). Research methods on civil service evaluation indicators on citizen satisfaction. The Proceedings of 2001 Conference of the Korean Association for Public Administration 2001, 197-212. Retrieved from http://kiss.kstudy.com.oca.korea.ac.kr/journal/thesis_name. asp?tname=kiss2002&key=1734597 Park, Y. (2013). A study on the factors influencing the family strengths of married immigrant women: Focusing on family stress and acculturative stress (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hanyoung Theological University, Seoul, Korea. Song, H., & Park. J. Y. (2011). A study on the application of a meta-evaluation approach for the development of an evaluation scale for multicultural family support services. Journal of Korean Family Resource Management Association, 15(3), 43-62. Retrieved from http://www.earticle.net.oca. korea.ac.kr/article.aspx?sn=150673%20 ORCID Kyoung Eun Kim http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9454-0427 JungHa Lim http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0638-0687 Bogchong Kang http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6362-4206 EunYoung Jo http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2780-3287 Received February 29, 2016 Revision received June 1, 2016 Accepted June 11, 2016