Quarterly of Educational Measurement

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Article Writing Guide

Files

Reviewers 2019

Reviewers 2020

Reviewers 2021

Reviewers 2022

Psychometric Properties of Human agency Scale :Classical Test Theory and Graded item Response Theory

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD Student in Educational Psychology, Kharazmi University of Tehran

2 Teachers Educational Psychology

3 Head of Educational Psychology department, psychology & educational science faculty, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

4 kharazmi university

Abstract

One of the factors that can be the link between our intentions and actions and their external consequences is human agency, which indicates the conscious design and intentional execution of actions by the individual in order to influence future events.
Objective and Method: This research with a developmental approach of psychometric method and method 1, examines the psychometric indices of the Human Factor Characteristics Scale using the classical theory of test score measurement and the graduated question-answer theory. The purpose of this study, which included high school students in Tehran, was selected by cluster sampling of 500 people as a sample size and statistical analysis was performed on 481 data. To collect the data, the ion Human Agent Characteristics Scale (2011) was used and the research questions were evaluated using IRTPRO and SPSS software.
Results:The assumption of local independence based on Pearson x2 index was established by applying Simjima's calibrated question-answer theory and the assumption of being one-dimensional based on the analysis of multidimensional question-answer theory. Diagnosis parameters with question-answer approach and classical approach Test score Both item 25 approach had the lowest and item 2 had the highest diagnosis parameter. The answer thresholds for all the questions were so far apart that no option was covered by the other option, and the options were independently selected by individuals at intervals of theta. The total scale was calculated with Cronbach's alpha of 0.945, intentionality of 0.894, foresight of 0.780, self-reactivity of 0.871 and rethinking of 0.762. Also, the role of each item in internal consistency was investigated by the loop method, which all questions had a favorable role in internal consistency of this scale. The value of the validity coefficient obtained from the question-answer theory was obtained by marginal method for intentionality 0.92, forethought 0.85, self-reaction 0.91, rethinking 0.83.
.

Keywords

References
امیری، محمد عسگری، مبارکه، کریم و عریضی، سید حمیدرضا. (1397). اثربخشی آموزش ایمن‌سازی در مقابل استرس بر احساس عاملیت و میانگین هفتگی قند خون ناشتا در بیماران دیابتی. فصلنامه روان‏شناسی سلامت، 7(3)، (پیاپی 27)، 31-48.
براتی، هاجر عریضی، حمیدرضا دری، بهروز و قاسمی، وحید. (1394). الگوی تحلیل مسیر متغیرهای روان‌شناختی و واکنش به تغییر در کارکنان مجتمع پتروشیمی بندر امام. مجله فرایند مدیریت توسعه، 28(1)، 165-188.
بشرپور، سجاد و احمدی، شیرین. (1396). نقش حس عاملیت و آلکسی تایمیا در پیش‌بینی مقاومت در برابر تغییر در مصرف‌کنندگان مواد. مجله طب انتظامی، 6(3)، 179-187.
عشورنژاد، فاطمه کدیور، پروین حجازی، الهه و نقش، زهرا. (1397). تحلیل چند سطحی بهزیستی روان‌شناختی نوجوان‌ها از راه عاملیت فردی، فرهنگ مدرسه و حمایت خانواده. فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی روان‏شناسی کاربردی، 12(47)، 357-374.
عشورنژاد، فاطمه کدیور، پروین و حجازی، الهه. (1396). رابطه عاملیت، برنامه‌ریزی و فرهنگ مدرسه با بهزیستی روان‌شناختی و پیشرفت تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان عادی و تیزهوش:تحلیل چند سطحی. فصلنامه پژوهش‌های نوین روان‌شناختی، 12(47)، 79-106.
فتحی محمدرضا، کیامنش علیرضا و جمهری، فرهاد. (1397). نقش عاملیت انسانی، جنس و سن در ویژگی‌های هویتی: بزرگ‌سالی در حال ظهور آرن. روانشناسی تحولی (روانشناسان ایرانی)، 15(57)، 33-44.
فراهانی، علی یار محمدیان، احمد، ملک پور، مختار و عابدی، احمد. (1396). ساخت و اعتباریابی پرسشنامه احساس عاملیت نابینایان. فصلنامه اندازه‌گیری تربیتی، 8(30)،  111-165.
هومن، حیدر علی. (1390). تحلیل داده‌های چند متغیری در پژوهش رفتاری، چاپ دوم. تهران: انتشارات پیک فرهنگ.
 
 
References
Ayala, R.J.D. (2009). The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory. New York: Guilford Press.
Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory. ERIC clearinghouse on assessment and evaluation.
Bandura (2018). Toward a Psychology of Human Agency: Pathways and Reflections. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2018, Vol. 13(2) 130 –136. 16.
Bandura, (2008 b). The reconstrual of "free will" from the agentic perspective of social cognitive theory.
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. Am J Psychol. 44(9): 1175-84.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology,52,1-26.
Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a Psychology of Human Agency. Stanford University: Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), P.164-180
Bessaha ML. Factor structure of the Kessler psychological distress scale (K6) among emerging adults. Res Soc Work Prac. 2017;27(5):616-624. 17.
Blanchin, M., Hardouin, J. B., Guillemin, F., Falissard, B., & Se ́bille, V. (2013). Power and sample size determination for the group comparison of patient-reported outcomes with rasch family models. PLoS One. 8(2), 1-13.
Bortolotti, S. L.V., Tezza, R., de Andrade, D. F., Bornia, A. C., & de Sousa Júnior, A. F. (2013). Relevance and advantages of using the item response theory. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 47(4), 2341–2360.
Cai, L., Du Toit, S. H. C., & Thissen, D. (2011). IRTPRO: User guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
Comrey AL, Lee HB. A first course in factor analysis: Psychology Press; 2013
David, N., Obhi, S., & Moore, J. W. (2015).  Editorial: Sense of agency: examining awareness of the acting self. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 9.
DeMars, C. (2010). Item response theory. Understanding statistics measurement. City: Oxford University Press.
Edwards, M. C., Houts, C. R., & Cai, L. (2018). A diagnostic procedure to detect departures from local independence in item response theory models. Psychological Methods, 23(1), 138-149.
Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item response theory for psychologists. 2000. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ
Etelapelto, A., Vahasantanen, K., Hokka, P. & Paloniemi, S. (2013). What is Agency? Conceptualizing professional agency at work. Educational Research Review 10, 45–65.
 Friston, K (2012). Prediction, perception and agency.Int J Psychophsiol;83(2): 248-52. from:http:/www.googlescholar.com. Accessed 07 February 2013.
Furukawa TA, Kessler RC, Slade T, Andrews G. The performance of the K6 and K10 screening scales for psychological distress in the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being. Psychol Med. 2003;33(2):357-362.
Haggard, P, & Tsakiris, M. (2009). The experience of agency feelings, judgments, and responsibility. J Curr Dir Psychol Sci; 18(4): 242-6.
 Haladyna, T.M. (2004). Developing and Validating Multiple-Choice Test Items. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Hambleton, R. K., Van der Linden, W. J., & Wells, C. S. (2010). IRT models for the analysis of polytomously scored data: Brief and selected history of model building advances. In M. L. Nering & R. Ostini (Eds.), Handbook of polytomous item response theory models. Published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Hiltin & Elder, G. H. (2007). Agency: An Empirical Model of an Abstract Concept. Advances in Life Course Research, Volume 11, 33–67.
Hitlin, S., & Johnson, M.K (2015). Reconceptualizing agency within the life course: The power of looking ahead. American Journal of Sociology, 120, 1429-1472.
Hunter, J., & Cooke, D. (2007). Through autonomy to agency: Giving power to language learners, Prospect, 22(2), 72-88.
Jääskelä, P., Poikkeus, A. M., Vasalampi, K., Valleala, U. M., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2016). Assessing agency of university students: validation of the AUS Scale. Studies in Higher Education, 5(2): 1-19.
Jiang,S.,Wang,C.,&Weiss,D. (2016). The sample size requirements for estimation of item parameters in the multidimensional graded response model.  Frontiers in Psychology. 7(1), 1-10.
Kawabe, T. (2013). Inferring sense of agency from the quantitative aspect of action outcome. Consciousness and Cognition, 22, 407–412.
Kean, J. & Reilly, J. (2014). Item response theory. Handbook for Clinical Research: Design, Statistics and Implementation. (pp195-198). New York, NY: Demos Medical Publishing.
Kjell, O.N.E., Nima, A.A., Sikström, S., Archer, T., & Garcia, D. (2013). Iranian and Swedish Adolescents: Differences in Personality Traits and Well-Being, PeerJ 1: e197.
Kline, R.B. Principlesandpracticeofstructuralequationmodeling(3rded.). NewYork: GuilfordPress. (2010).
Le, D. T. (2013). Applying item response theory modeling in educational research.
Maggio, K. M. (2015). Why do you see it that way? The preferences of confrontational behavior as seen through attachment style and facework behavior. Doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware.
Marshal.V.W. (2005).Agency events,and structure at the end of the life course.Advances in Life Course Research, 10, 57-91
Neal DJ, Corbin WR, Fromme K. Measurement of alcohol-related consequences among high school and college students: application of item response models to the Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index. Psychol Assess. 2006;18(4):402-414.
Oreg, S, Vakola, M, Armenakis, A. Bozionelos, N, Gonza Lez, L, Hrebickova, M. et al. (2008). Dispositinal Resistance to change:Measurement Equivalence and the Link to Personal Values across 17 Nations. J Applied Psychol; 93(4): 935-44.
Ostini, Remo, and Michael L. Nering. 2006. Polytomous Item Response Theory Models. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, series no. 07-144. Thousand Oaks, Sage Pubns.
Polito, V, Barnier, A.J, Woody, E.Z (2013). Developing the Sense of Agency Rating Scale (SOARS): an empirical measure of agency disruption in hypnosis. J Conscious Cogn; 22(3): 684-96.
Reckase, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. New York: Springer Verlag.
Salami O.S. (2010). Emotional intelligence, self-efficacy, psychological wellbeing and student's attitudes: implications for quality education, European Journal of Educational Studies, 2, 247-257.
Sijtsma, K., Molenaar, W. (2002). Introduction to Nonparametric Item Response Theory. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Tate R.A comparison of selected empirical methods for assessing the structure of response to test items.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2003; 27(3): 159-203
Thissen, D., Cai, L., & Bock, R. D. (2010). The nominal item response model. In M. Nering & R. Ostini (Eds.), Handbook of polytomous item response theory models (pp. 43-75). New York, NY: Routledge.
Wehmeyer, M. L. (2004). Beyond Self-Determination: Causal Agency Theory. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, Vol. 16, No. 4, 337- 359.
Yoon, H.J. (2011). The development and validation of the assessment of human agency employing Albert Bandura´s human agency theory. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.The Pennsylvania State University.
Quarterly of Educational Measurement
Volume 13, Issue 47
April 2022
Pages 113-144
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics