Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 283–289 | Cite as

Measuring attitudes to science: Unidimensionality and internal consistency revisited

  • Paul L. Gardner
Article

Abstract

Summated ratings attitude scales commonly consist of numerous items whose scores are summed to yield a total score. An assumption underlying this technique is that the items in the scale reflect a common construct. If this is not met, the procedure produces uninterpretable data. Although this psychometric principle has been known for a long time, numerous studies in the literature demonstrate a neglect of it. Some make no attempt to conceptualise the construct to be measured; others conceptualise the construct but then ignore the possibility that it may be multidimensional; still others contain evidence indicating that the construct is multidimensional and then proceed to ignore that evidence. A possible contributor to the confusion is the misunderstanding of the related yet distinct concepts of internal consistency and unidimensionality. This paper presents examples of poor and good instrument design, in the hope that clarification of the issues might make a difference in the future.

Keywords

Internal Consistency Summate Rating Attitude Scale Distinct Concept Rating Attitude 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Billeh, V. Y., & Zakhariades, G. A. (1975). The development and application of a scale for measuring scientific attitudes.Science Education, 59(2), 155–165.Google Scholar
  2. Brink, P. J., & Wood, M. J. (1988).Basic steps in planning nursing research (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Jones & Bartlett.Google Scholar
  3. Coulson, R. (1992). Development of an instrument for measuring attitudes of early childhood educators towards science.Research in Science Education, 22, 101–105.Google Scholar
  4. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.Google Scholar
  5. DeVellis, R. F. (1991).Scale development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Gardner, P. L. (1975). Attitude measurement: A critique of some recent research.Educational Research, 17(2), 101–109.Google Scholar
  7. Gardner, P. L. (1987). Comments on “Toward the development of a children's science curiosity scale”.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 175–176.Google Scholar
  8. Graham, J. R., & Lilly, R. S. (1984).Psychological testing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  9. Green, S. B., Lissitz, R. W., & Mulaik, S. A. (1977). Limitations of coefficient alpha as an index of test unidimensionality.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37, 827–838.Google Scholar
  10. Harty, H., & Beall, D. (1984). Toward the development of a children's science curiosity measure.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 425–436.Google Scholar
  11. Harvey, T. J., & Vaughan, J. (1990). Student nurse attitudes towards different teaching/learning methods.Nurse Education Today, 10, 181–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (1990).Nursing research: Methods, critical appraisal and utilization (2nd ed.) St. Louis, MO: C. V. Mosby.Google Scholar
  13. Piper, M. K., & Moore, K. D. (1977). The effect of a physics course for elementary teachers on attitudes toward science of preservice elementary teachers.Attitudes towards science: Investigations (pp. 20–28). Ohio: SMEAC, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  14. Polit, D. F., & Hungler, B. P. (1995).Nursing research: Principles and methods (5th ed.) Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott.Google Scholar
  15. Woods, N. F. (1988). Assessing nursing research measures: Reliability and validity. In N. F. Woods & M. Catanzaro,Nursing research: Theory and practice. St Louis, MO: C. V. Mosby.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian Science Education Research Association 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations