The Iowa infant feeding attitude scale: Analysis of reliability and validity

320Citations
Citations of this article
289Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Development of the Iowa Infant Feeding Attitude Scale (IFAS) is described. In Study 1, a set of 17 items was selected on the basis of responses by 125 postpartum women. Analyses of the reliability and validity were then conducted. In Study 2, these analyses were replicated using data from an independent sample of 130 postpartum women. Study 3 involved an analysis of the ability of scores on the IFAS to predict duration of breast-feeding among a sample of 725 women who had initiated that method of feeding their babies while in the hospital. Limitations of this research and possible future uses of the IFAS in studies addressing the determinants and consequences of infant-feeding attitudes are discussed.

References Powered by Scopus

The resurgence of breastfeeding in the united states

264Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Predicting and understanding mothers' infant-feeding intentions and behavior: Testing the theory of reasoned action

223Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Impact of attitudes on maternal decisions regarding infant feeding

144Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Predictors of breastfeeding duration: Evidence from a cohort study

392Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition (APrON) cohort study: Rationale and methods

142Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The influence of psychological factors on breastfeeding duration

127Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

De La Mora, A., Russell, D. W., Dungy, C. I., Losch, M., & Dusdieker, L. (1999). The Iowa infant feeding attitude scale: Analysis of reliability and validity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(11), 2362–2380. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb00115.x

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 102

67%

Researcher 25

16%

Professor / Associate Prof. 15

10%

Lecturer / Post doc 10

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Nursing and Health Professions 67

43%

Medicine and Dentistry 53

34%

Social Sciences 25

16%

Psychology 11

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 2

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free