A Generalized Scale for Measuring Interest in Science Subjects

Webb, Sam C.

doi:10.1177/001316445101100316

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because of the time factor in scaling this many items, two sets of items were randomly generated, and each set was administered to a separate sample of 85 undergraduate students. For scaling purposes, a modification of Thurstone's prescribed sorting technique was utilized (Siegel & Siegel, 1961;Webb, 1951). Students were instructed to rate each item on an 11-point continuum on the degree to which the expression connoted an affective guilt reaction ranging from 11, extremely guilty, through 6, moderately guilty, to 1, not guilty.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

State-trait measure of experiential guilt.

Otterbacher¹,

Munz²

1973

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To meet the need for a situational measure of guilt, the Perceived Guilt Index, a self-report measure of experiential guilt, was developed. The index has two subscales which assess guilt as an affective state of the person at the moment (G-State) and as a generalized self-concept (G-Trait). Comprised of 11 adjectives empirically weighted to represent relatively evenly distributed intensity points along a guilt continuum and chosen because of their common semantic structure, the Perceived Guilt Index represents an attempt to quantify common verbal labels used to communicate the intensity of emotional relations to guilt. Construct validity studies were performed and strong support was found for the theory underlying the development of the instrument. Implications pertaining to future research with the Perceived Guilt Index are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

State-trait measure of experiential guilt.

Otterbacher¹,

Munz²

1973

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Items were mimeographed instead of presenting them on individual cards for judgments; five instead of the usual 11 sorting categories were used; 20 rather than 200 to 300 judges were employed. Based on research findings subsequent to Thurstone's early work, the newer time saving methods appear to be as valid (3, 9,12).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thurstone Scale for Measuring Attitudes of College Students toward Physical Fitness and Exercise

Richardson

1960

Research Quarterly. American Association for Health, Physical E

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For each question an 1 1-point continuum ranging from ' extremely difficult ' through ' average ' to ' extremely easy ' was provided. This rating procedure was a modification of Thurstone's prescribed sorting technique (Webb, 1951) ; that is, instead of sorting each statement into one of 1 1 piles, the raters were provided with a continuum for each item consisting of numbers from 1 to 1 1 with a circle under each number and were asked to darken in the circle that indicated their rating. Each continuum was labelled appropriately-extremely difficult, 11 ; average 6 ; and extremely easy, 1.…”

Section: Itern-di Ficulty Scalingmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Perceived Item‐difficulty Sequencing in Academic Testing

Munz

Jacobs²

1971

Brit J of Edu Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary. In order to evaluate a method for deriving subjective item‐difficulty values and to assess the effects of subjective item‐difficulty sequencing in academic testing, 142 introductory psychology students and nine introductory psychology instructors scaled 210 multiple‐choice examination questions on the subjective difficulty students would experience when attempting to solve an item. Item arrangements, hard‐to‐easy (H‐E), easy‐to‐hard (E‐H), and random (R) were constructed using perceived item‐difficulty values and randomly distributed the following semester as a final examination to 133 introductory psychology students. Prior to the final examination the Achievement Anxiety Test was administered. To assess the effects of item sequencing on the examinee a situational measure of test‐taking anxiety was taken along with test evaluation information and performance data. Results suggested that (1) test constructors should consider the effects of subjective item‐difficulty sequencing on the examinee's test evaluation as providing the only empirical justification for advocating that items be sequenced E‐H, and (2) measurement of the test content factor is contaminated by test‐taking anxiety to a greater degree under the R and E‐H sequence formats than under the H‐E format.

show abstract

A Generalized Scale for Measuring Interest in Science Subjects

Cited by 14 publications

References 5 publications

State-trait measure of experiential guilt.

State-trait measure of experiential guilt.

Thurstone Scale for Measuring Attitudes of College Students toward Physical Fitness and Exercise

An Evaluation of Perceived Item‐difficulty Sequencing in Academic Testing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About