Factor validation of the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale: An Assessment and Review Tom R. EikebrokkEllen K. NyhusUniversity of Agder.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reliability and Validity of Researcher-Made Surveys.
Advertisements

The Fit of the Interaction with Disabled Persons Scale (IDP) on Professionals in the Disability Community Jacqueline D. Stone, PhD, Baltimore, MD, United.
MGT-491 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FOR MANAGEMENT
The Technology-Rich Outcomes-Focused Learning Environment Inventory (TROFLEI): A Cross-Cultural Validation Anita Welch, Claudette Peterson, Chris Ray,
Part II Knowing How to Assess Chapter 5 Minimizing Error p115 Review of Appl 644 – Measurement Theory – Reliability – Validity Assessment is broader term.
RESEARCH METHODS Lecture 18
Project supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia – FCT (Project Nº SFRH/BD/33648/2009) Victor E.C. Ortuño 1,3, Maria Paula Paixão 1,4 & Isabel.
Developing and validating a stress appraisal measure for minority adolescents Journal of Adolescence 28 (2005) 547–557 Impact Factor: A.A. Rowley.
Common Factor Analysis “World View” of PC vs. CF Choosing between PC and CF PAF -- most common kind of CF Communality & Communality Estimation Common Factor.
RELIABILITY consistency or reproducibility of a test score (or measurement)
When Measurement Models and Factor Models Conflict: Maximizing Internal Consistency James M. Graham, Ph.D. Western Washington University ABSTRACT: The.
Measurement Models and CFA Ulf H. Olsson Professor of Statistics.
A Structural Equation Modeling Approach to Students’ Homework Assignment Web Sites Usage Emel DIKBAS TORUN Hacettepe University Eralp ALTUN Ege University.
Personality, 9e Jerry M. Burger
Education 795 Class Notes Factor Analysis II Note set 7.
Research Methods in MIS
Quantitative Research
Multivariate Methods EPSY 5245 Michael C. Rodriguez.
Factor Analysis Psy 524 Ainsworth.
2 Enter your Paper Title Here. Enter your Name Here. Enter Your Paper Title Here. Enter Your Name Here. ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION.
Data validation for use in SEM
Psychometric Properties of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Clinician and Group Adult Visit Survey September 11, 2012.
A New Look at the Evaluation of Sociological Theories in International Large Scale Educational Assessments Daniel Caro and Andrés Sandoval-Hernandez CIES.
Statistics for Education Research Lecture 10 Reliability & Validity Instructor: Dr. Tung-hsien He
Issues in structural equation modeling Hans Baumgartner Penn State University.
Unanswered Questions in Typical Literature Review 1. Thoroughness – How thorough was the literature search? – Did it include a computer search and a hand.
MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE ACCEPTANCE OF MICROBLOGGING SOCIAL NETWORKS: 1 THE µBTAM MODEL FRANCISCO REJÓN-GUARDIA FRANCISCO J. LIÉBANA-CABANILLAS.
How to Write a Critical Review of Research Articles
User Study Evaluation Human-Computer Interaction.
A Method Factor Measure of Self-concept. Paper presented at the 26th annual meeting of The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Model Confirmatory.
Ethnic Identity among Mexican American Adolescents: The Role of Maternal Cultural Values and Parenting Practices 1 Miriam M. Martinez, 1 Gustavo Carlo,
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS TOWARD ACTIVE LEARNING IN STATISTIC 2 COURSE AND THEIR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT Vanny Septia Efendi.
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling Class 8: Confirmatory Factory Analysis.
Measurement Models: Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis James G. Anderson, Ph.D. Purdue University.
Learning Objective Chapter 9 The Concept of Measurement and Attitude Scales Copyright © 2000 South-Western College Publishing Co. CHAPTER nine The Concept.
Reliability Analysis Based on the results of the PAF, a reliability analysis was run on the 16 items retained in the Task Value subscale. The Cronbach’s.
Computer self-efficacy and anxiety scales for an Internet sample : testing measurement equivalence of existing measures and development of new scales 指導教授:溫嘉榮.
Introduction A small but growing literature points to an important connection between forgiveness and physical health (Worthington, Witvliet, Lerner, &
Personality Trait Change in Adulthood Brent W. Roberts Daniel Mroczek.
Measures of Fit David A. Kenny January 25, Background Introduction to Measures of Fit.
G Lecture 7 Confirmatory Factor Analysis
In late 2003, Jost and colleagues received death threats for publishing a paper that said that being politically conservative served a number of ‘existential.
CFA: Basics Beaujean Chapter 3. Other readings Kline 9 – a good reference, but lumps this entire section into one chapter.
1 All about variable selection in factor analysis and structural equation modeling Yutaka Kano Osaka University School of Human Sciences IMPS2001, July.
The Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) is the primary measure of self- compassion in both social/personality psychology and clinical research (Neff, 2003). It.
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling Class 8: Confirmatory Factory Analysis.
Criteria for selection of a data collection instrument. 1.Practicality of the instrument: -Concerns its cost and appropriateness for the study population.
The effects of Peer Pressure, Living Standards and Gender on Underage Drinking Psychologist- Kanari zukoshi.
Chapter 15 The Chi-Square Statistic: Tests for Goodness of Fit and Independence PowerPoint Lecture Slides Essentials of Statistics for the Behavioral.
Reliability performance on language tests is also affected by factors other than communicative language ability. (1) test method facets They are systematic.
Chapter 17 STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)  Relatively new statistical technique used to test theoretical or causal.
Latent Curve Modeling to Understand Achievement Emotions Gavin Brown Quant-DARE Methods Showcase Feb 22, 2016.
An Evaluation of an Observation Rubric Used to Assess Teacher Performance Kent Sabo Kerry Lawton Hongxia Fu Arizona State University.
Discussion & Conclusion
Ramasawmy, S., Fort, I. & Gilles, P.-Y.
1University of Oklahoma 2Shaker Consulting
Structural Equation Modeling using MPlus
Reliability and validity of the BREQ-2 for measuring high school students’ motivation for physical education Stuart Forsyth¹, David Rowe¹, and Nanette.
Chapter 15 Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Participants and Procedures
Dr. Chin and Dr. Nettelhorst Winter 2018
Exploring the relationship between Authentic Leadership and Project Outcomes and Job Satisfaction with Information Technology Professionals by Mark A.
PSY 614 Instructor: Emily Bullock, Ph.D.
Writing about Structural Equation Models
EPSY 5245 EPSY 5245 Michael C. Rodriguez
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS TOWARD ACTIVE LEARNING IN STATISTIC 2 COURSE AND THEIR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT Vanny Septia Efendi.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Data validation for use in SEM
Parent Alliance Measure By: Richard R. Abidin & Timothy R. Konold
Testing Causal Hypotheses
Presentation transcript:

Factor validation of the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale: An Assessment and Review Tom R. EikebrokkEllen K. NyhusUniversity of Agder

2 Motivation The Consideration of Future Consequences (CFC) Scale: - Widely used for measuring future time perspective in social psychology. - Only validated with (small) student samples: - Strathman et al (1994): Validated the 12-item CFC-scale using 3 small student samples - Petrocelli (2003): Tested the factor structure using a larger student sample and confirmatory factor analyses. Found 2 factors and recommended a 8-item CFC-scale - Joireman et al. (2008): Tested the factor structure using different student samples and recommend a two-factor measurement scale separating items describing near or distant future - Research on other scales in psychology (e.g. Self esteem and Worry) show that reverse wording can create method effects and suggest additional factors in EFA and CFA (e.g. Marsh, 1996; Brown, 2003). - Few users of the CFC scale examine the factor structure, and interpretation of results are difficult. Theory wrong or measurement error? - Our purpose: Test temporal stability, factor structure and method effects using a large representative sample.

3 The Scale The CFC-scale consists of 12 statements (7 reversed scored), to which respondents express their opinion by using a 5-point scale (Dutch version and a 7-point scale in our survey) Sample questions: 1. I consider how things might be in the future, and try to influence those things with my day to day behaviour. 3. I only act to satisfy immediate concerns, figuring the future will take care of itself. Composite CFC-score usually computed by using average response to the 12 questions.

4 The Data Dutch DNB Household Survey 2005, 2006 and 2007 (Tilburg University) Panel of 2000 households representative of the Dutch population with respect to socio-economic variables Data collected through the Internet panel of CentERdata ( Questionnaires that may be answered in 30 minutes or less are transmitted to the households on a weekly basis The DNB-HS includes detailed information about respondents’ wages, family situation, education and tenure, as well as items designed to tap various psychological concepts – among them the CFC

5 Stability in Answers over Time 2006/ /2007 Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Composite CFC (12 items) N Pearson correlation coefficients All significant at.001 level

6 Hypothesized factor structure of the CFC-scale MODEL 1: Original 12 item Scale (Strathman et al., 94) MODEL 2: EFA: Three factor 10 item Scale MODEL 3: Method Effects: One factor 10 item scale

7 Results of CFA (Lisrel 8.72) MODEL 1MODEL 2MODEL 3 χ 2 ML = , df=54, p<0.01 χ 2 ML = , df=32, p<0.01 χ 2 ML = , df=20, p<0.01 All estimates significant CFI= 0.67 (≥0.95)CFI= 0.97 (≥0.95)CFI= 0.98 (≥0.95) RMSEA = 0.20 (≤0.06)RMSEA = (≤0.06)RMSEA = (≤0.06) SRMR = 0.14 (≤0.08)SRMR = (≤0.08)SRMR = (≤0.08) TLI/NNFI = 0.60 (≥0.95)TLI/NNFI = 0.95 (≥0.95) Modification Index (MI) Error cov. btw. 1,2; 7,8 MI: Error cov. btw. 1,2 Model fit criteria adopted from Hu & Bentler (1999)

8 Reliability MODEL 1MODEL 2MODEL 3 Item reliability (IR): 1>0.7 (5>0.5) (≥0.7) IR: 4>0.7 (9>0.5) (≥0.7) IR: 2>0.7 (4>0.5) (≥0.7) Average variance extracted (AVE): 0.22 (≥0.5) AVE:0.44/0.35/0.46 (≥0.5) AVE: > 0.20 (≥0.5) Composite reliability (CR): 0.74 (≥0.6) CR: 0.75/0.51/0.77 (≥0.6) CR:0.80 (≥0.6)

9 Results and Discussion The 12 items CFC-scale does not fit to a sample of representative data EFA suggests several factors most likely due to method effects The reduced 10 indicator one-factor CFC model fits the data best when method effects of reversely worded items are controlled for Further use of the CFC-scale should be aware of possible method effects which otherwise could suggest other factors (e.g. Petrocelli, 2003, Joireman et al., 2008) other studies should investigate improvements in item reliabilities The CFC-scale has reasonable temporal stability supporting CFC as a stable individual trait Future research should test the factor structure using other realistic samples