آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 31 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 1,030 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,097 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 10,334,930 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 8,569,215 |
Psychometric Properties of Abbott’s Creative Self-efficacy Inventory for Iranian Adolescents | ||
| دست‌آوردهای روان‌شناختی | ||
| دوره 30، ویژه نامه انگلیسی، مرداد 1402، صفحه 37-50 اصل مقاله (1.19 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: ویژه نامه به زبان انگلیسی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22055/psy.2023.44595.3103 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Farzaneh Michaeli Manee* 1؛ Sheler Abkhiz2 | ||
| 1Associate Professor of Educational Psychology, Department of Psychology, Literature & Human Science Faculty, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran | ||
| 2Masters graduate of Educational Psychology, Department of Psychology, Literature & Human Science Faculty, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Aim: Taking into account the importance of creativity and the effective role of creative self-efficacy (CSE) in it, several attempts have been performed to develop appropriate measures. One of the multi-dimensional tools to assess CSE is Abbott’s (2010) creative self-efficacy inventory. The current study is an attempt to investigate factor structure and psychometric properties of Abbott’s CSE Inventory (2010) in Persian sample. The other objectives were to examine the differences in CSE regarding age and gender. Methods: The participants of this study were students in the age range of 13-19 years and also were schooling in 7th-12th grades of West Azerbaijan high schools (N= 400). Abbott’s CSE Inventory (2010) and intellect/imagination subscale of five factors personality Mini-IPIP scale were used. CFA was executed using AMOS and the data was analysed by SPSS software. Results: Reliability coefficients of raters for creative thinking self-efficacy (CTSE) and creative performance self-efficacy (CPSE) were 0.96 and 0.97 respectively (p<0.01). In addition, internal consistency of the whole scale, CPSE, and CTSE based on Cronbach’s alpha was 0.95, 0.88, and 0.93 respectively. The results showed that two factors were identified by the EFA, with eigenvalues greater than 1. These two factors were retained with 59.529 % of the total variance. The CFA supported construct validity of the CSE Inventory and its multi-factor structure. Also, there was no difference between the genders in terms of CSE, while CSE and age were directly related. Conclusion: The current research revealed that the structure and psychometric properties of the CSE Inventory for the Iranian sample are adequate | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Adolescents؛ Age-based differences؛ Creative self-efficacy inventory؛ Gender-based differences؛ Validation | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abbott, D. (2010). Constructing a creative self-efficacy inventory: A mixed methods inquiry (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE. Alotaibi, K. N. (2016). Psychometric Properties of Creative Self-Efficacy Inventory Among Distinguished Students in Saudi Arabian Universities. Psychological Reports, 118(3), 902-17. Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 75–105. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. Blakemore, S. J. (2012). Imaging brain development: the adolescent brain. Neuroimage, 61(2), 397-406. Bilton, I. (2018, March 7). Women are outnumbering men at a record high in universities worldwide. Study International. https://www.studyinternational.com/news/record-high-numbers-women-outnumbering-men-university-globally/ Cook, D. A., & Beckman, T. J. (2006). Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: theory and application. The American journal of medicine, 119(2),166, e167-116. Csikszentmihalyi, M. A. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Donnellan, M.B., Oswald, F.L., Baird, B.M., & Lucas, R.E. (2006). The mini-IPI scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the big five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 192-203. Eysenck, H. J. (1997). Creativity and personality. In M. A. Runco. (Ed.), The creativity research handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 41–66). Cresskill, 805. NJ: Hampton Press. Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. J. Deary, F. De Fruyt, and F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (7, 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press. Grabner, R. H, & Fink. A. (2016). Reflection enhances creativity: Beneficial effects of idea evaluation on idea generation. Brain and Cognition, 103, 30-37. Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & Fisser, P. (2016). Infusing Creativity and Technology in 21st Century Education: A Systemic View for Change. Educational Technology & Society, 19 (3), 27–37. Hora, S., Lemoine, G. J., Xu, N., & Shalley, C. E. (2021). Unlocking and closing the gender gap in creative performance: A multilevel model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(3), 297-312. Ingram, P. B., Boan-Lenzo, C., & Vuyk, M. A. (2013). Openness/intellect in a 50-item IPIP instrument. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. 31(6), 600-605. Karwowski, M. (2011). It doesn't hurt to ask…But sometimes it hurts to believe: Polish students' creative self-efficacy and its predictors. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(2), 154–164 Karwowski, M., Lebuda, I., Beghetto, R.A. (2019). Creative self-beliefs. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity ( 2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press, New York. Kheir Joo, E., Herfeh Doost, M., & Rastgoo, N. (2017). Factorial Structure and Validity of Personality Inventory Mini-IPIP. Educational Measurement, 7(25), 522-532. McIntyre, P. (2008). Creativity and cultural production: A study of contemporary Western popular music songwriting. Creativity research journal, 20(1), 40-52. Puryear, J. S., Kettler, T., & Rinn, A. N. (2019). Relating personality and creativity: Considering what and how we measure. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(2), 232-245. Reilly, D., Neumann, D. L., & Andrews, G. (2019). Gender differences in reading and writing achievement: evidence from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). American Psychological Association, 74(4), 445–458. Ripa, Y. (2021 February 7). Women and the Olympic Games. Encyclopédie d'histoire numérique del'Europe [online]. ehne.fr/en/node/12316 Runco, M. A. (1999). A longitudinal study of exceptional giftedness and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 12(2), 161-164. Sangsuka, P., & Siriparpb, T. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis of a scale measuring creative self-efficacy of undergraduate students. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 1340–1344. Shavarini, M. K. (2005). The feminisation of Iranian higher education. International review of education, 51(4), 329-347. Shi, B., Dai, D. Y., & Lu, Y. (2016). Openness to experience as a moderator of the relationship between intelligence and creative thinking: A study of Chinese children in urban and rural areas. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 641. Torrance, E. P. (2004). Great expectations: Creative achievements of the socio-metric stars in a 30-years survey. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16(1), 5–13. Vally, Z., Salloum, L., AlQedra, D., El Shazly, S., Albloshi, M., Alsheraifi, S., Alkaabi, A. (2019). Examining the effects of creativity training on creative production, creative self-efficacy, and neuro-executive functioning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 70–78 | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 242 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 363 |
||