0.903
IF
1.06
CiteScore
0.510
SJR
1.062
SNIP
Research paper
 
CC-BY 4.0
 
 

Development of Marine Science Affect Scale for Junior High School Students in Taiwan: Testing for Measurement Invariance

Cheng-Chieh Chang 1  ,  
 
1
National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung, TAIWAN
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(1):53–60
Online publish date: 2017-10-27
Publish date: 2017-10-27
KEYWORDS:
ABSTRACT:
This study constructed a marine science affect scale to understand junior high school students’ emotions toward the ocean. This work comprised three stages. First, the researcher compiled factors and items associated with marine perception through an extensive literature review. Second, the compiled factors, the items of each factor, and their content validity were examined by eight experts, and a scale was constructed containing 7 items with 2 factors. Third, this was tested on a sample of 1,683 Taiwanese junior high students. The results from a series of multigroup confirmatory factor analyses supported the reliability, content and construct validity, and gender invariance of the questionnaire.
 
REFERENCES (34):
1. Beauducel, A., & Wittmann, W. W. (2005). Simulation study on fit indexes in CFA based on data with slightly distorted simple structure. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(1), 41-75.
2. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: JohnWiley & Sons.
3. Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.
4. Byrne, B. M. (2008). Testing for multigroup equivalence of a measuring instrument: A walk through the process. Psicothema, 20, 872-882.
5. Byrne, B. M., & Stewart, S. M. (2006). The MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of a second-order structure: A walk through the process. Structural Equation Modeling, 13(2), 287-321.
6. Chang, H. C., & Cherng, B. L. (2010). The interaction effects between action control orientation and success/failure conditions on cognition, motivation, and emotion. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 41(3), 605-634。.
7. Chen, F. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1005-1018.
8. Cherng, B. L., & Lin, C. S. (2000). The effects of action control training course. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 31(2), 1-21.
9. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2000). Assessing extreme and acquiescence response sets in cross cultural research using structural equations modeling. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 188-213.
10. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233-255.
11. Chin, C. C. (2009). Developing an instrument for assessing college students’ affection toward science writing. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 12(4), 113-140.
12. Chiu, Y. C., Hung, S. C., & Chou, H. S. (2013). Development of physical education class affection scale for college students. Sports & Exercise Research, 15(2), 182-194.
13. Crawford, J. R. & Henry, J. D. (2004). The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 245-265.
14. Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2005). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 63-73). New York: Oxford University Press.
15. Ebesutani, C., Okamura, K., Higa-McMillan, K., & Chorpita, B. F. (2011). A psychometric analysis of the positive and negative affect schedule for children–parent version in a school sample. Psychological Assessment, 23(2), 406-416.
16. Ebesutani, C., Regan, J., Smith, A., Reise, S., Higa-McMillan, C., & Chorpita, B. F. (2012). The 10-item positive and negative affect schedule for children, child and parent shortened versions: Application of item response theory for more efficient assessment. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 34, 191-203.
17. Fan, X., & Sivo, S. (2005). Evaluating the sensitivity and generalizability of SEM fit indices while controlling for severity of model misspecification. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(3), 343-367.
18. Karim, J., Weisz, R., & Rehman, S. U. (2011). International positive and negative affect schedule short-form (I-PANAS-SF): Testing for factorial invariance across cultures. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2016-2022.
19. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
20. Light, R. (2003). The joy of learning: Emotion and learning in games through TGfU. Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 36(1), 93-108.
21. Meade, A. W., Johnson, E. C., & Braddy, P. W. (2008). Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in the tests of measurement invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 568-592.
22. Milfont, T. L., & Fischer, R., (2010). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 111-121.
23. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2012). Mplus User´s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
24. Pires, P., Filgueiras, A., Ribas, R., Santana, C. (2013). Positive and negative affect schedule: Psychometric properties for the Brazilizn Portuguese version. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 16, 1-9.
25. Pringle, R. (2010). Finding pleasure in physical education: A critical examination of the educative value of positive movement affects. Quest, 62(2), 119-134.
26. Satorra, A. (2000) Scaled and adjusted restricted tests in multi-sample analysis of moment structures. In R. D. H. Heijmans, D. S. G. Pollock & A. Satorra (Eds.), Innovations in multivariate statistical analyses. A festschrift for Heinz Neudecker (pp. 233–247). London: Kluwer Academic.
27. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
28. Thompson, E. R. (2007). Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 38(2), 227-242.
29. Tsai, L. T., & Yang, C. C. (2012). Improving measurement invariance assessments in survey research with missing data by novel artificial neural network. Expert Systems with Application. 39, 10456-10464.
30. Tsai, L. T., & Yang, C. C. (2013). Evaluating latent interaction effects by model-based Sattora-Bentler scaled chi-square test and path-based Z-test. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 55(2), 41-54.
31. Tsai, L. T., Yang, C. C., & Chang, Y. J. (2015). Gender differences in factors affecting science performance of eighth grade Taiwan students. Asia-Pacific Education Research, 24(2), 445-456.
32. Tseng, W. C. (2007). The study of folk concepts of the good life and subjective well-being among college students. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 38(4), 417-441.
33. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070.
34. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006). Analysis of factorial invariance across gender in the Taiwan version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1259-1268.
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215