The Promise and Pitfalls of Self-report

Fryer, Luke K.; Dinsmore, Daniel L.

doi:10.14786/flr.v8i3.623

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found doing so to be an effective method of assessing processing. Indeed, capturing the nature of students' strategy use during task completion has long proven to be a formidable challenge (Fryer and Dinsmore, 2020). On the one hand, thinkaloud procedures have been effective at capturing students' online processing.…”

Section: Differences In Processing By Strategy Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategy Use in Learning From Multiple Texts: An Investigation of the Integrative Framework of Learning From Multiple Texts

List

Alexander

2020

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined undergraduates' strategy use when learning about a complex and controversial topic (i.e., mass incarceration in the United States) based on information presented across multiple texts. Guided by the Integrated Framework of Learning from Multiple Texts, this study directed students to engage in one of three forms of strategy use while learning from multiple texts. In particular, students were asked to identify relevant and important information in texts (i.e., intratextual processing), to form relations or connections across texts (i.e., intertextual processing), or to identify easy or difficult to understand information in texts (i.e., metacognitive processing). In addition to receiving task instructions directing them to engage in these modes of processing, students were also provided with a highlighting tool to scaffold their strategy use (e.g., by allowing important and relevant information to be marked in green, in the intratextual processing condition). This highlighting tool also enabled researchers to collect log data of students' manifest strategy use. Students were found to demonstrate differential patterns of strategy use in accordance with their assigned processing conditions. Moreover, students' use of strategies directed toward multiple texts was found to predict multiple text task performance.

show abstract

Section: Differences In Processing By Strategy Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategy Use in Learning From Multiple Texts: An Investigation of the Integrative Framework of Learning From Multiple Texts

List

Alexander

2020

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The articles in this special issue shed light on a number of theoretical constructs associated with motivation and strategy use, but the main objective of this collection is to examine the self-report methodology used to study these constructs. The task for the articles in this issue, including this commentary, was to use three organizing questions to "determine when and if" (Fryer & Dinsmore, 2020) self-report measures positively contribute to the study of theoretical SRL constructs. This final conclusion section focuses on this task by considering first, the question of "if" self-report measures can contribute followed by the question of when this might be true.…”

Section: Conclusion and Final Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, the purpose of this special issue is to examine the use of self-report measures and address the challenge of determining "when and if selfreport measures can contribute to our collective understanding of theory surrounding constructs." (Fryer & Dinsmore, 2020). The articles in this issue represent different ways of answering that call.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement and the Study of Motivation and Strategy Use: Determining If and When Self-report Measures are Appropriate

Meter

2020

FLR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this special issue is to examine the use of self-report measures in the study of motivation and strategy use. This commentary reviews the articles contained in this special issue to address the primary objective of determining if and when self-report measures contribute to understanding these major constructs involved in self-regulated learning. Guided by three central questions, this review highlights some of the major, emergent themes regarding the use of self-report. The issues addressed include attention to evidence for construct validity, the need to consider broad methodological factors in the collection and interpretation of self-report data, and the innovations made possible by modern tools for administering and analyzing selfreport measures. Conclusions forward a set of conditions for the use of self-report measures, which center on the role of theoretically-driven choices in both the selection of self-report measures and analysis of the data these measures generate.

show abstract

“…The present special issue (Fryer & Dinsmore, 2020) has planted its flag in an unpopular or extremely popular-depending on your perspective-area of research. Unpopular because of the nature of self-reported data: if it is qualitative, it lacks external validity, and if it is quantitative, it is ordinal at best.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The How of Survey Self-report: VAS-Likert-Slide-Swipe... Same difference?

Fryer

2020

FLR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-report is a fundamental research tool for the social sciences. Despite quantitative surveys being the workhorses of the self-report stable, few researchers question their format-often blindly using some form of Labelled Categorical Scale (Likert-type). This study presents a brief review of the current literature examining the efficacy of survey formats, addressing longstanding paper-based concerns and more recent issues raised by computer-and mobile-based surveys. An experiment comparing four survey formats on touch-based devices was conducted. Differences in means, predictive validity, time to complete and centrality were compared. A range of preliminary findings emphasise the similarities and striking differences between these self-report formats. Key conclusions include: A) that the two continuous interfaces (Slide & Swipe) yielded the most robust data for predictive modelling; B) that future research with touch self-report interfaces can set aside the VAS format; C) that researchers seeking to improve on Likert-type formats need to focus on user interfaces that are quick/simple to use. Implications and future directions for research in this area are discussed.

show abstract

The Promise and Pitfalls of Self-report

Cited by 24 publications

References 27 publications

Strategy Use in Learning From Multiple Texts: An Investigation of the Integrative Framework of Learning From Multiple Texts

Strategy Use in Learning From Multiple Texts: An Investigation of the Integrative Framework of Learning From Multiple Texts

Measurement and the Study of Motivation and Strategy Use: Determining If and When Self-report Measures are Appropriate

The How of Survey Self-report: VAS-Likert-Slide-Swipe... Same difference?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About