测量思维模式和成就目标动机：三种工具的验证研究。

Measuring Mindsets and Achievement Goal Motivation: A Validation Study of Three Instruments.

机构信息

D.A. Cook is professor of medicine and medical education; research chair, Mayo Multidisciplinary Simulation Center; director of education science, Mayo Office of Applied Scholarship and Education Science; and consultant, Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2383-4633. B.L. Gas is education coordinator, Center for Clinical and Translational Science-Education Resources, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7140-4956. A.R. Artino Jr is professor, Department of Medicine, F. Edward Hébert School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2661-7853.

出版信息

Acad Med. 2018 Sep;93(9):1391-1399. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002290.

DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000002290

PMID:29794517

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the validity of scores from three instruments measuring achievement goal motivation-related constructs: a shortened version of Dweck's Implicit Theories of Intelligence Scale (ITIS-S), measuring incremental and entity mindsets; Elliot's Achievement Goal Questionnaire-Revised (AGQ-R), measuring mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance achievement goals; and Midgley's Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS), measuring mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance achievement goals.

METHOD

High school students participating in a medical simulation training activity in May 2017 completed each instrument. The authors evaluated internal structure using reliability and factor analysis and relations with other variables using the multitrait-multimethod matrix.

RESULTS

There were 178 participants. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha) was > 0.70 for all subscores. Confirmatory factor analysis of ITIS-S scores demonstrated good model fit. Confirmatory factor analysis of AGQ-R scores demonstrated borderline fit; exploratory factor analysis suggested a three-domain model (approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-avoidance). Confirmatory factor analysis of PALS scores also demonstrated borderline fit; exploratory factor analyses suggested consistent distinction between mastery and performance goals but inconsistent distinction between performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Correlations among AGQ-R and PALS scores were large for mastery (r = 0.72) and moderate for performance (≥ 0.45) domains; correlations among incremental and mastery scores were moderate (≥ 0.34). Contrary to expectations, correlations between entity and performance scores were negligible. Correlations between conceptually unrelated domains were small or negligible.

CONCLUSIONS

All instrument scores had good internal consistency and generally appropriate relations with other variables, but empirically determined domain structures did not consistently match theory.

摘要

目的

评估三个用于测量成就目标动机相关结构的工具的分数的有效性：德韦克内隐智力理论量表（ITIS-S）的缩短版，用于衡量增量和实体心态；埃利奥特成就目标问卷修订版（AGQ-R），用于衡量掌握-接近、掌握-回避、表现-接近和表现-回避成就目标；以及米吉莱的适应性学习模式量表（PALS），用于衡量掌握、表现-接近和表现-回避成就目标。

方法

2017 年 5 月参加医学模拟培训活动的高中生完成了每个工具。作者使用可靠性和因素分析评估内部结构，并使用多特质-多方法矩阵评估与其他变量的关系。

结果

共有 178 名参与者。所有子分数的内部一致性信度（Cronbach alpha）均>0.70。ITIS-S 分数的验证性因素分析表明模型拟合良好。AGQ-R 分数的验证性因素分析表明边界拟合；探索性因素分析表明存在三域模型（接近、掌握回避、表现回避）。PALS 分数的验证性因素分析也表明边界拟合；探索性因素分析表明掌握和表现目标之间有明显区别，但表现接近和表现回避目标之间没有明显区别。AGQ-R 和 PALS 分数之间的相关性在掌握（r=0.72）和表现（≥0.45）领域均较大；增量和掌握分数之间的相关性中等（≥0.34）。与预期相反，实体和表现分数之间的相关性微不足道。概念上不相关的领域之间的相关性较小或微不足道。