(3.80.6.131) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/17 03:43
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

: 
twitterline
研究生:黃俊維
研究生(外文):Huang, Chun-Wei
論文名稱:自我描述量表(SDQ-I)的試題區分功能分析
論文名稱(外文):Differential Item Functioning of the Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ-I)
指導教授:吳佩真吳佩真引用關係
指導教授(外文):Wu, Pei-Chen
口試委員:郭國禎黃財尉
口試委員(外文):Kuo, Kuo-ChenHuang, Tsai-Wei
口試日期:2014-01-10
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立屏東教育大學
系所名稱:教育心理與輔導學系碩士班
學門:教育學門
學類:綜合教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2014
畢業學年度:102
語文別:中文
論文頁數:92
中文關鍵詞:試題區分功能Rasch模式試題反應理論自我描述量表自我概念
外文關鍵詞:differential item functioningRasch modelitem response theorySelf-Description Questionnaireself-concept
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:1449
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:72
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究之目的旨在對自我描述量表(Self-Description Questionnaire I, SDQ-I)各分量表與因素進行試題區分功能(differential item functioning;DIF)分析,以南部474位國小學童為受試者,蒐集兩次間隔一學期的縱貫性資料。首先,經由向度性檢驗發現父母因素在非學業分量表獨立成為另一個向度。因此,本研究分別對學業、非學業分量表、以及一般與父母因素四個向度進行分析。研究重點分析結果如下:
一、SDQ-I跨性別與年級DIF檢驗之研究結果
1.SDQ-I之學業分量表存在16題(53%)至17題(57%)性別DIF試題、非學業分量表存在8題(22%)至11題(31%)、一般因素在前後時間均存在2題(20%)、以及父母因素之時間一存在1題(11%)。此外,性別DIF試題可歸納出清楚的規則,例如:在學業分量表,「數學」因素的DIF試題利於男生,「國語」因素的DIF試題利於女生;在非學業分量表,「身體」因素的DIF試題利於男生,「外貌」與「同儕」因素的DIF試題利於女生;以及在一般因素,前後時間之性別DIF試題完全一致。其中,學業與非學業自我概念之性別DIF試題均有性別刻板印象的現象。
2.SDQ-I之學業分量表存在2題(7%)至3題(10%)年級DIF試題、非學業分量表均存在10題(28%)、一般因素均存在1題(10%)、以及父母因素存在1題(11%)至5題(55%)。此外,年級DIF試題亦可歸納出清楚的規則,例如:在學業分量表,「數學」因素的DIF試題利於低年級,「國語」因素的DIF試題利於高年級;在非學業分量表,「外貌」因素的DIF試題利於低年級,「同儕」因素的DIF試題利於高年級;在一般因素,前後時間之年級DIF試題完全一致;以及在父母因素,前後時間試題5均利於低年級。
二、性別與年級在SDQ-I各分量表與因素的差異及其DIF試題對結果的影響之研究結果
1.在原始試題,受試者能力值在時間一之學業分量表,以及前後時間之非學業分量表存在性別差異,且均是男生的自我概念能力值高於女生;然而,一般與父母因素不存在性別差異。另外,年級差異未顯著存在前後時間學業、非學業分量表、一般與父母因素。
2.在刪除DIF試題,受試者能力值在前後時間之非學業分量表存在性別差異,且是男生的自我概念能力值高於女生;然而,學業分量表、一般與父母因素不存在性別差異。另外,年級差異未顯著存在前後時間學業、非學業分量表、一般與父母因素。
3.性別DIF試題對時間一學業分量表性別差異的結果有影響,且DIF試題也減少性別在非學業分量表的效果值;然而,年級DIF試題對學業、非學業分量表、一般與父母因素之年級差異的結果均無影響。
三、縱貫性DIF檢驗及校正DIF試題影響後,SDQ-I各分量表跨時間比較結果之研究結果
1.SDQ-I之學業分量表存在6題(20%)跨時間DIF試題、非學業分量表存在2題(6%)、一般因素存在2題(20%)、以及父母因素存在1題(11%)、以及各分量表的試題閾值亦不具不變性,表示SDQ-I各分量表與因素都有跨時間的DIF試題及閾值不恆等。
2.對DIF試題校正後,受試者能力值在學業、非學業分量表、以及一般與父母因素前後時間均無顯著差異。然而,若未考量DIF試題,受試者能力值在非學業分量表、一般與父母因素前後時間均達到顯著差異,且皆是隨著年齡增長而提高,表示跨時間的DIF試題會影響受試者能力值。因此,若進行SDQ-I前後測,直接比較前後受試者能力分數的改變會因未考量DIF試題而產生誤導性的結果。
本研究最後根據SDQ-I之DIF檢驗結果提出討論,並對未來研究方向、以及教育心理與諮商輔導實務工作提出建議。
The purpose of this study is to examine item differential functioning (DIF) of the Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ-I) using Rasch model. The participants were recruited 474 children from several elementary schools. In examination on dimensionality of the SDQ-I, the resutls that items associated with Parent-relations factor in Non-Academic subscale exhibited unidimensionally. Thus, DIF analyses were conducted individually based on four subscales (i.e., Academic self-concept, Non-Academic self-concept subscales, General self-esteem, and Parent-relations factors). The main results in the study were delineated as follows:
DIF Analyses across Gender and Grades
1.There were 16 (53%)-17 (57%), 8 (22%)-11 (31%), 2 (20%), and 1 (11%) gender DIF items in Academic, Non-Academic subscales, General, and Parent factors, respectively. Items associated with Math and Psychical self-concept favored the boys; items regarding Reading, Appearance, and Peer-relations self-concept favored the girls. Specifically, these DIF items could be explained by gender stereotypes.
2.There were 2 (7%)-3 (10%), 10 (28%), 1 (10%), and 1 (11%)-5 (55%) grade DIF items in Academic, Non-Academic subscales, General, and Parent factors, respectively. Items associated with Math and Appearance self-concept favored the lower-grade students; items regarding Reading and Peer-relations favored the higher-grade students.
Gender and Grade Differences on SDQ-I
1.Comparing gender differences on each subscale, the results found boys tended to have higher scores on Academic subscale at time1 and Non-Academic subscale than girls did. However, no gender differences were found in General, and Parent factors. Regarding grade differences, no significant differences were identified in Academic, Non-Academic subscales, General, and Parent factors.
2.When deleting DIF items, gender differences were found in Non-Academic subscale, suggesting that boys tended to obtain higher scores than girls did. However, no gender differences were found in Academic subscale, General, and Parent factors. Regarding grade differences, no grade differences were identified in Academic, Non-Academic subscales, General, and Parent factors.
The Effects of DIF on Gender and Grade Differences
1.The effects of DIF on gender differences were found in Academic and Non-Academic subscales; however, there were inconsequential effects of DIF on grade differences in each subscale.
DIF Detection for Longitudinal Analyses
1.There were 6 (20%), 2 (6%), 2 (20%), and 1 (11%) DIF items across different points in Academic, Non-Academic subscales, General, and Parent factor, respectively. Also, non-invariant thresholds in SDQ-I subscales were identified.
2.When adjusting DIF items, there were no significant differences across time in Academic, Non-Academic subscales, General, and Parent factor. In contrast, without adjusting DIF items, there were significant differences across time in Non-Academic subscale, General, and Parent factors. As a result, when there are no DIF items of SDQ-I across time, can the differences of self-concept across pretest and posttest be justified.
Finally, the study proposed some promising suggestions for further studies as well as practitioners.
第一章 緒論1
第一節 研究動機1
第二節 研究問題5
第三節 名詞釋義6

第二章 文獻探討9
第一節 自我概念的意義9
第二節 SDQ-I的因素結構11
第三節 自我概念的性別與年級差異17
第四節 試題區分功能21
第五節 自我概念試題區分功能26

第三章 研究方法31
第一節 研究架構31
第二節 研究假設33
第三節 研究對象34
第四節 研究工具35
第五節 統計分析方法36

第四章 研究結果39
第一節 DIF檢驗結果39
第二節 性別與年級在SDQ-I各分量表與因素的差異及其DIF試題對結果之影響61
第三節 縱貫性DIF檢驗及校正DIF試題影響後,SDQ-I各分量表與因素跨時間比較結果66

第五章 討論與建議75
第一節 結論75
第二節 討論78
第三節 研究建議與未來方向、研究限制83

參考文獻87

表次
表3-1 最後有效樣本分配表34
表4-1 時間一與時間二之學業、非學業分量表與一般因素不適配題目摘要表40
表4-2 時間一與時間二學業分量表之試題適合度摘要表41
表4-3 時間一與時間二非學業分量表之試題適合度摘要表42
表4-4 時間一與時間二一般因素之試題適合度摘要表43
表4-5 時間一與時間二父母因素之試題適合度摘要表44
表4-6 時間一與時間二學業、非學業分量表、一般與父母因素之受試者與試題的分隔指標與信度摘要表45
表4-7 時間一與時間二學業分量表之性別DIF摘要表47
表4-8 時間一與二非學業分量表之性別DIF摘要表49
表4-9 時間一與二一般因素之性別DIF摘要表50
表4-10 時間一與時間二父母因素之性別DIF摘要表51
表4-11 時間一與時間二學業分量表之年級DIF摘要表53
表4-12 時間一與時間二非學業分量表之年級DIF摘要表55
表4-13 時間一與時間二一般因素之年級DIF摘要表56
表4-14 時間一與時間二父母因素之年級DIF摘要表57
表4-15 時間一與二DIF比較表59
表4-16 刪除DIF試題摘要表61
表4-17 性別差異在原始試題與刪除DIF試題結果摘要表63
表4-18 年級差異在原始試題與刪除DIF試題結果摘要表65
表4-19 學業分量表之試題難度值與閾值摘要表67
表4-20 非學業分量表之試題難度值與閾值摘要表68
表4-21 一般因素之試題難度值與閾值摘要表69
表4-22 父母因素之試題難度值與閾值摘要表70
表4-23 試題閾值定錨摘要表71
表4-24 各分量表或因素具跨時間恆等的試題71
表4-25 前後時間受試者能力差異之結果摘要表73

圖次
圖2-1 三個二階因素模型14
圖2-2 八因素模型15
圖2-3 焦點組與參照組齊一性DIF的分布情形22
圖2-4 焦點組與參照組非齊一性DIF的分布情形22
圖3-1 研究流程圖32
Ackerman, T. (1992). A didactic explanation for item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 67-91.
Adams, R. J., Wilson, M., & Wang, W. C. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement. 21, 1-23.
Akande, A. (1999). Intercultural and cross-cultural assessment of self-esteem among youth in Twenty-first Century South Africa. International Journal for the Advancement of Counseling, 21, 171-187.
Andrich, D. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561-573.
Bilby, R. W., Brookover, W. B., & Erickson, E. L. (1972). Characterizations of self and student decision making. Review of Educational Research, JL2, 505-524.
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bracken, B. A. (1996). Handbook of self-concept: Development, social, and clinical considerations. New York: Wiley.
Byrne, B. M., & Worth Gavin, D. A. (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.
Chapman, P. L., & Mullis, A. K. (2002). Readdressing gender bias in the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory--short form. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163, 403-409.
Coopersmith, S. A. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Dorans, N. J., & Kulick, E. (2006). Differential Item Functioning on the Mini-Mental State Examination: An application of the Mantel-Haenszel and standardization procedures. Medical Care, 44, S107-S114.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. NY: Norton.
Eshel, Y., & Klein, Z. (1981). Development of academic self-concept of lower-class and middle-class primary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 287-293.
Fletcher, R., & Hattie, J. (2005). Gender differences in physical self-concept: A multidimensional Differential Item Functioning analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 657-667.
Gentile, B., Grabe, S., Brenda, D. P., Twenge, J. M., Wells, B. E., & Maitino, A. (2009). Gender differences in domain-specific self-esteem: A meta-analysis. Review of General Psychology, 13, 34-45.
Harter, S. (1979). Manual: Perceived Competence Scale for children. Denver, CO: University of Denver.
Kaminski, P. L., Shafer, M. E., Neumann, C. S., & Ramos, V. (2005). Self-concept in Mexican American girls and boys: Validating the Self-Description Questionnaire-I. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 11, 321-338.
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.
Leung, C., & Tsang, S. K. (2009). The Chinese Parental Stress Scale: Psychometric evidence using Rasch modeling on clinical and nonclinical sample. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 26-34.
Linacre, J. M. (2004). A user’s guide to Winsteps Rasch-model computer program. Available from www.winsteps.com.
Linacre, J. M. (2006). A user’s guide to facets: Rasch-model computer program. Available from www.winsteps.com.
Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of Item Response Theory to practical testing problems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Marsh, H. W. (1989). Age and sex effects in multiple dimensions of self-concept: Preadolescence to early adulthood. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 417-430.
Marsh, H. W. (1990). A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 77–122.
Marsh, H. W., & Ayotte, V. (2003). Do multiple dimensions of self-concept become more differentiated with age? The differential distinctiveness hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 687-706.
Marsh, H. W., Barnes, J., Cairns, L., & Tidman, M. (1984). Self-Description Questionnaire: Age and sex effects in the structure and level of self-concept for preadolescent children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 940-956.
Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., & Debus, R. (1991). Self-concepts of young children 5 to 8 years of age: Measurement and multidimensional structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 377-392.
Marsh, H. W., Ellis, L. A., & Craven, R. G. (2002). How do preschool children feel about themselves? Unraveling measurement and multidimensional self-concept structure. Developmental Psychology, 38, 376-393.
Marsh, H. W., & Holems, I. W. (1990). Multidimensional Self-Concepts: Construct Validation of Responses by Children. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 89-117.
Marsh, H. W., Relich, J. D., & Smith, I. D. (1983). Self-concept: The construct validity of interpretations based upon the SDQ. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 173-187.
Master, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
Nicholls, J. (1979). Development of perception of attainment and causal attributions for success and failure in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 94-99.
Piers, E. V. (1984). Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale: Revised manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Ponsoda, V., Abad, F. J., Francis, L. J., & Hills, P. R. (2008). Gender differences in the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory: The incidence of differential item functioning. Journal of Individual Differences, 29, 217-222.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment test. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedogogiske Institute.
Reise, S. P., Ainsworth, A. T., & Haviland, M. G. (2005). Item Response Theory: Fundamentals, applications, and promise in psychological research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 95-101.
Sears, P. S. (1963). Self-concept in the service of educational goals. California Journal for Instructional Improvement, 6, 3-12.
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.
Simmons, R. G., Rosenberg, F., & Rosenberg, M. (1973). Disturbance in the self-image at adolescence. American Sociological Review, 38, 553-568.
Smith, R. M., & Miao, C. Y.(1994). Assessing unidimensionality for Rasch measurement. In W. Wilson (Ed.), Objective measurement: Theory into practice. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Soares, L. M., & Soares, A. T. (1977, April). The self-concept: Mini, maxi, multi?. Paper presented at the 1977 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
Teresi, J. A., & Fleishman, J. A. (2007). Differential Item Functioning and health assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16 Suppl 1, 33-42.
Wang, W. C. (2008). Assessment of Differential Item Functioning. Journal of applied Measurement, 9(4), 387-408.
Watkins, D., Dong, Q., & Xia, Y. (1997). Age and gender differences in the self-esteem of Chinese children. Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 374.
Watkins, D., Juhasz, A. M., Walker, A., & Janvlaitiene, N. (1995). The Self-Description Questionnaire-1: A Lithuanian application. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11, 41-51.
Watkins, D., & Mpofu, E. (1994). Some Zimbabwean evidence of the internal structure of the Self Description Questionnaire-I. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 967-972.
Wilgenbusch, T., & Merrell, K. W. (1999). Gender differences in self-concept among children and adolescents: A meta-analysis of multidimensional studies. School Psychology Quarterly, 14, 101-120.
Wolfe, E. W., & Chiu, C. W. (1999). Measuring pretest-posttest change with a Rasch Rating Scale Model. J Outcome Meas, 3(2), 134-161.
Wolfe, E. W., & Singh K. (2011). A comparison of Structural Equation and multidimensional Rasch modeling approaches to Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Journal of applied Measurement, 12(3), 212-221.
Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch measurement transactions, 8, 370.
Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating Scale analysis. Rasch measurement. MESA press.
Wu, P. C., Kung, H. Y., & Wey, S. C. (2008, October). Construct validation of the Chinese version of Self-Description Questionnaire I (SDQ I -C). Taiwanese Psychology 47th Annual Conference, National Taiwan Normal University , Taipei.
Wyse, A. E. (2013). DIF Cancellation in the Rasch model. Journal of applied Measurement, 14(2), 118-128.
Young, E. L., & Sudweeks, R. R. (2005). Gender Differential Item Functioning in the Multidimensional Self-Concept Scale with a sample of early adolescent students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 38, 29-44.
Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 223-233.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top