Psychometric properties of the Polish adaptation of the Blood Donation Ambivalence Survey
1
Laboratory of Health Psychology and Quality of Life, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Pedagogy and Psychology, Jan Kochanowski University, Kielce, Poland
Submission date: 2025-04-08
Final revision date: 2025-06-24
Acceptance date: 2025-07-18
Online publication date: 2026-09-18
Corresponding author
Paweł Kosowski
Uniwersytet Jana Kochanowskiego w Kielcach, Wydział Pedagogiki i Psychologii, Katedra Psychologii, Pracownia Psychologii Zdrowia i Jakości Życia
Uniwersytet Jana Kochanowskiego w Kielcach, Wydział Pedagogiki i Psychologii, Katedra Psychologii, Pracownia Psychologii Zdrowia i Jakości Życia
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Ambivalence toward blood donation – defined as the coexistence of conflicting positive and negative attitudes – has emerged as a critical psychological barrier to sustained donor engagement. Despite its relevance, validated tools to assess this construct remain limited in non-English-speaking populations and particularly in Polish language.
Aim of the research:
The present study aimed to adapt and validate the Polish version of the Blood Donation Ambivalence Survey (BDAS) and compare levels of commitment and indecision among active, former, and non-donors.
Material and methods:
The study sample consisted of 665 Polish adults, randomly split into two subsamples. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to evaluate the scale’s structural validity. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s and McDonald’s . External validity was examined via correlations with fear of donation, affect, self-efficacy, and Theory of Planned Behaviour constructs.
Results:
The Polish BDAS replicated the original two-factor structure – Commitment and Indecision – with satisfactory model fit indices and strong internal consistency ( and > 0.80). It demonstrated significant associations with related psychological constructs and invariance across genders. Donor status was significantly associated with ambivalence dimensions: active donors reported the highest commitment and lowest indecision.
Conclusions:
The Polish BDAS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing blood donation ambivalence. It holds promise for both research and intervention targeting donor motivation and retention.
Ambivalence toward blood donation – defined as the coexistence of conflicting positive and negative attitudes – has emerged as a critical psychological barrier to sustained donor engagement. Despite its relevance, validated tools to assess this construct remain limited in non-English-speaking populations and particularly in Polish language.
Aim of the research:
The present study aimed to adapt and validate the Polish version of the Blood Donation Ambivalence Survey (BDAS) and compare levels of commitment and indecision among active, former, and non-donors.
Material and methods:
The study sample consisted of 665 Polish adults, randomly split into two subsamples. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to evaluate the scale’s structural validity. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s and McDonald’s . External validity was examined via correlations with fear of donation, affect, self-efficacy, and Theory of Planned Behaviour constructs.
Results:
The Polish BDAS replicated the original two-factor structure – Commitment and Indecision – with satisfactory model fit indices and strong internal consistency ( and > 0.80). It demonstrated significant associations with related psychological constructs and invariance across genders. Donor status was significantly associated with ambivalence dimensions: active donors reported the highest commitment and lowest indecision.
Conclusions:
The Polish BDAS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing blood donation ambivalence. It holds promise for both research and intervention targeting donor motivation and retention.
REFERENCES (27)
1.
Priester JR, Petty RE. The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996; 71(3): 431-439.
2.
Fox KR, Himawan LK, France CR. The Blood Donation Ambivalence Survey: measuring conflicting attitudes about giving blood. Transf Med. 2018; 28(3): 193-199.
3.
Balaskas S, Koutroumani M, Rigou M. The mediating role of emotional arousal and donation anxiety on blood donation intentions: expanding on the theory of planned behavior. Behav Sci. 2024; 14(3): 242.
4.
Kosowski P. Voluntary blood donation in Poland – about the need for social Research on barriers and disadvantages. In: СОЦІОЛОГІЯ–СОЦІАЛЬНА РОБОТА ТА СОЦІАЛЬНЕ ЗАБЕЗПЕЧЕННЯ: РЕГУЛЮВАННЯ СОЦІАЛЬНИХ ПРОБЛЕМ. 2023. p. 50.
5.
Adamczyk MD. Starzenie się społeczeństwa polskiego wyzwaniem dla zrównoważonego rozwoju. Zeszyty Naukowe Organizacja i Zarządzanie, Politechnika Śląska. 2017; 106: 105-113.
6.
Kowalsky JM, France CR, France JL, Whitehouse EA, Himawan LK. Blood donation fears inventory: development and validation of a measure of fear specific to the blood donation setting. Transf Apheresis Sci. 2014; 51(2): 146-151.
7.
Kosowski P. The Polish adaptation of the blood donation fears inventory. Transf Apheresis Sci. 2024; 63(1): 103865.
8.
Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988; 54(6): 1063-1070.
9.
Brzozowski P, Watson DB, Clark LA. Skala uczuć pozytywnych i negatywnych SUPIN: polska adaptacja skali PANAS Davida Watsona i Lee Ann Clark. Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych Polskiego Towarzystwa Psychologicznego 2010.
10.
Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M, editors. Measures in health psychology: a user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs. Windsor: NFER-Nelson; 1995. p. 35-37.
11.
Juczyński Z. Narzędzia pomiaru w promocji i psychologii zdrowia. Vol. 188. Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych Polskiego Towarzystwa Psychologicznego 2001.
12.
France JL, Kowalsky JM, France CR, McGlone ST, Himawan LK, Kessler DA, Shaz BH. Development of common metrics for donation attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, and intention for the blood donation context. Transfusion (Paris). 2014; 54(3pt2): 839-847.
13.
Kosowski P. Polish adaptation of measures of attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and intentions based on the Theory of Planned Behavior in the context of blood donation. Polish Psychological Forum. 2025; 30(3). doi:10.34767/PFP.2025.03.03.
14.
Van Prooijen JW, Van Der Kloot WA. Confirmatory analysis of exploratively obtained factor structures. Educ Psychol Meas. 2001; 61(5): 777-792.
16.
Gallucci M, Jentschke S. SEMLj: jamovi SEM analysis [jamovi module]. 2021 [cited 2025 Mar 15]. Available from: https://semlj.github.io/.
17.
Kermani FR, Kafi-Abad SA, Maghsudlu M, Hosseini KM, Mohammadali F, MohammadJafari A. Development and validation of the self-regulation of blood donation scale for blood donors. Hematol Transfus Cell Ther. 2024; 46: S299-S305.
18.
Hyde MK, Masser BM. Eligible blood donors’ decisions about donating stool for fecal microbiota transplantation: does ambivalence play a role? Transfusion (Paris). 2021; 61(2): 474-483.
19.
Padilla-Garrido N, Fernández-Herrera MD, Aguado- Correa F, Rabadán-Martín I. Motivators, barriers and communication channels for blood donation in relation to students at a university in Spain. Transf Apheresis Sci. 2021; 60(6): 103270.
20.
Fernández de la Iglesia JC, Martínez-Santos AE, Rodríguez- González R, Cebreiro B, Fernández-Morante C, Casal-Otero L. Service-learning to improve attitudes towards blood donation among university students. Health Educ J. 2020; 79(7): 812-825.
21.
Edwards AR, Masser BM, Barlow FK. Psychological ownership and identity motives in blood donation. Vox Sang. 2023; 118(8): 616-623.
22.
Saltzmann C, Boenigk S. On consciousness of the decision to discontinue blood donation: intention to return and effective recovery activities. Transf Med. 2022; 32(3): 193-209.
23.
Handy F, Cnaan RA. The role of social anxiety in volunteering. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh. 2007; 18(1): 41-58.
24.
Vecina ML, Chacón F. Dropout predictors for volunteers in non-profit organizations: a 7-year survival analysis. Rev Mex Psicol. 2017; 34(1): 13-23.
25.
Ferguson E, Lawrence C. It is only fair: blood donors are more sensitive to violations of fairness norms than nondonors – converging psychometric and ultimatum game evidence. Vox Sang. 2018; 113(3): 242-250.
26.
Weigold A, Weigold IK, Russell EJ. Examination of the equivalence of self-report survey-based paper-and-pencil and internet data collection methods. Psychol Methods. 2013; 18(1): 53.
27.
Boas TC, Christenson DP, Glick DM. Recruiting large online samples in the United States and India: Facebook, Mechanical Turk, and Qualtrics. Pol Sci Res Methods. 2020; 8(2): 232-250. .
| eISSN: | 2300-6722 |
| ISSN: | 1899-1874 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
