Validity Evidence based on Internal Structure of Scores on the Spanish Version of the Self-Description Questionnaire-II

  1. Inglés Saura, Cándido J. 2
  2. Torregrosa Díez, María Soledad 2
  3. Hidalgo Montesinos, María Dolores 3
  4. Núñez Pérez, José Carlos 11
  5. Castejón Costa, Juan Luis 4
  6. García Fernández, José Manuel 4
  7. Valle Arias, Antonio
  1. 1 Universidad de Oviedo
    info

    Universidad de Oviedo

    Oviedo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/006gksa02

  2. 2 Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche
    info

    Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche

    Elche, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01azzms13

  3. 3 Universidad de Murcia
    info

    Universidad de Murcia

    Murcia, España

    ROR https://ror.org/03p3aeb86

  4. 4 Universitat d'Alacant
    info

    Universitat d'Alacant

    Alicante, España

    ROR https://ror.org/05t8bcz72

Mostrar afiliaciones +
Revista:
The Spanish Journal of Psychology

ISSN: 1138-7416

Año de publicación: 2012

Volumen: 15

Número: 1

Páginas: 388-398

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.5209/REV_SJOP.2012.V15.N1.37345 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: The Spanish Journal of Psychology

Resumen

El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar la fiabilidad y validez de las puntuaciones en la versión española del Self-Description Questionnaire II (SDQ-II). El instrumento fue administrado a una muestra de 2022 estudiantes españoles (51,1% chicos) de 1º a 4º de educación secundaria obligatoria. El análisis factorial confirmatorio (CFA) fue usado para examinar la validez basada en la estructura interna de las puntuaciones del SDQ-II. El CFA replicó la estructura factorial de primer orden de 11 factores correlacionados. Además, el análisis factorial confirmatorio jerárquico (HCFA) fue usado para examinar el ordenamiento jerárquico del autoconcepto medido por las puntuaciones de la versión española del SDQ-II. Aunque se examinaron una serie de modelos de HCFA para evaluar la organización de componentes académicos y no académicos, el apoyo para estos modelos jerárquicos fue más débil que para la estructura factorial de primer orden de 11 factores correlacionados. Los resultados también indicaron que las puntuaciones de la versión española del SDQ-II tuvieron estimaciones de consistencia interna y fiabilidad test-retest dentro de un rango aceptable.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

This research was supported by a grant from the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (SEJ2004-07311/EDUC) for the first author.

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
  • Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397-438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705510903008204
  • Bentler, P. M. (2005). EQS 6.1: Structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.
  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Byrne, B.M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Byrne, B. M., & Gavin, D. W. (1996). The Shavelson model revisited: Testing for the structure of academic self-concept across pre, early and late adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 215-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.88.2.215
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Craven, R. G., Marsh, H. W., & Burnett, P. (2003). Cracking the self-concept enhancement conundrum: A call and blueprint for the next generation of self-concept enhancement research. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self research (pp. 91-126). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  • Dekker, S., & Fisher, R. (2008). Cultural differences in academic motivation goals: A meta-analysis across 13 societies. Journal of Education Research, 102, 99-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.102.2.99-110
  • Ellis, L. A., Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2005). Navigating the transition to adolescence and secondary school: A critical evaluation of the impact of peer support. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. McInerney (Eds.), New frontiers for research. Advances in Self Research, (Vol. 2, pp. 329-356). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  • Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modelling. In G. R. Hancock and R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modelling: A second course (pp. 269-314). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
  • Garaigordobil, M. (1999). Assessment of a cooperative-creative program of assertive behaviour and self-concept. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 2, 3-10.
  • Gilman, R., Laughlin, J. E., & Huebner, E. S. (1999). Validation of the Self-Description Questionnaire-II with an American sample. School Psychology International, 20, 300-307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0143034399203005
  • Guerin, F., Marsh, H. W., & Famose, J. P. (2003). Construct validation of the Self-Description Questionnaire II with a French sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 142-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027//1015-5759.19.2.142
  • Hambleton, R. K. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10, 229-244.
  • Hambleton, R. K., & Kanjee, A. (1995). Increasing the validity of cross-cultural assessments: Use of improved methods for test adaptations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11, 147-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.11.3.147
  • Hau, K. T., Kong, C. K., & Marsh, H. W. (2003). Chinese Selfdescription Questionnaire. Cross-cultural validation and extension of theoretical self-concept models. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self research (pp.49-65). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indixes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Leach, L. F., Henson, R. K., Odom, L. R., & Cagle, L. S. (2006). A reliability generalization study of the Self-Description Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 285-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164405284030
  • Marsh, H. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 129-149. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312023001129
  • Marsh, H. W. (1987). The hierarchical structure of self-concept and the application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 17-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1987.tb00259.x
  • Marsh, H. W. (1992) SDQ II: Manual. Sydney, Australia: Self Research Centre, University of Western Sydney.
  • Marsh, H. W. (2006). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice: The role of self-concept in educational psychology. Leicester, England: British Psychological Society.
  • Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., & McInerney, D. M. (2003). International advances in self-research. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self research (pp. 3-14). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  • Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Kong, C. K. (2002). Multilevel causal ordering of academic self-concept and achievement: Influence of language of instruction (English compared with Chinese) for Hong Kong students. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 727-763. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312039003727
  • Mash, H. W., & Hocevar, D. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 562-582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.3.562
  • Marsh, H. W., Parada, R. H., & Ayotte, V. (2004). A multidimensional perspective of relations between self-concept (Self Description Questionnaire II) and adolescent mental health (Youth Self-Report). Psychological Assessment, 16, 27-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.16.1.27
  • Marsh, H. W., Plucker, J. A., & Stocking, V. B. (2001). The Self-Description Questionnaire II and gifted students: Another look at Plucker, Taylor, Callahan, and Tomchińs (1997) "Mirror, mirror on the wall". Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 976-996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164 0121971608
  • Marsh, H. W., & Shavelson, R. (1985). Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure. Educational Psychologist, 20, 107-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2003_1
  • Martorell, M. C., Flores, P., Silva, F., & Navarro, A. (1992). Autoconcepto: Adaptación Española del SDQ-II de Marsh y Barnes [Self-concept: Spanish adaptation of Marsh and Barnes SDQ-II]. Revista de Psicología de la Educación, 3, 65-88.
  • Menjares, P. C., Michael, W. B., & Rueda, R. (2000). The development and construct validation of a Spanish version of an academic self-concept scale for middle school Hispanic students from families of low socioeconomic levels. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 3, 53-62.
  • Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (2007). Datos básicos de la educación en España en el curso 2006/2007 [Basic data of education in Spain during the academic year 2006/2007]. Madrid, Spain: Author.
  • Nishikawa, S., Norlander, T., Fransson, P., & Sundbom, E. (2007). A cross-cultural validation of adolescent self-concept in two cultures: Japan and Sweden. Social Behavior and Personality, 35, 269-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2007.35.2.269
  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-hill.
  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2002). A framework of reporting and interpreting internal consistency reliability estimates. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 35, 89-103.
  • Ortiz, M. J., Apocada, P., Etxebarria, I., Fuentes, M. J., & López, F. (2008). Predictores familiares de la internalización moral en la infancia [Family predictors of moral internalization in childhood]. Psicothema, 20, 712-717.
  • Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.128.1.3
  • Ponterotto, J. G., & Ruckdeschel, D. E. (2007). An overview of coefficient alpha and reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of internal consistency coefficients with psychological research measures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 105, 997-1014. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/PMS.105.7.997-1014
  • Riccio, C., & Rodríguez, O. L. (2007). Integration of psychological assessment approaches in school psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 243-255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.20220
  • Schunk, D. H., & Meece, J. L. (2006). Self-efficacy development in adolescence. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 71-96). Greenwich, England: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
  • Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Selfconcept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543046003407
  • Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: An introduction of coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80, 99-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18
  • Thompson, B. (1997). The importance of structure coefficients in structural equation modelling confirmatory factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 5-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164497057001001
  • Wilkinson, L., & The Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.8.594
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet