Advertisement

Unterrichtswissenschaft

, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 129–149 | Cite as

Skalen zur Erfassung von Leistungskausalattributionen für Grundschulkinder (SELKA-G)

  • Annette LohbeckEmail author
Allgemeiner Teil
  • 68 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Die vorliegende Studie stellt ein Selbstbeurteilungsverfahren für Grundschulkinder vor, das sowohl für die Erfolge als auch Misserfolge die Leistungskausalattributionen von Grundschulkindern der 3. und 4. Jahrgangsstufe im Fach Mathematik erfasst: die Skalen zur Erfassung von Leistungskausalattributionen für Grundschulkinder (SELKA-G). Ziel dieser Studie ist es, die psychometrische Qualität und die Validität der SELKA‑G an 405 Grundschulkindern der 3. und 4. Jahrgangsstufe zu überprüfen. Die testtheoretischen Ergebnisse (Reliabilitäten, Trennschärfen, Retest-Reliabilitäten) fielen zufriedenstellend aus. Konfirmatorische Faktorenanalysen bestätigten die Faktorenstruktur und skalare Messinvarianz für das Geschlecht. Die Validität ließ sich anhand der Korrelationen mit verschiedenen Außenkriterien (Selbstkonzept, Noten, Fürsorglichkeit bei der jeweiligen Lehrkraft) weitgehend stützen. Die SELKA‑G stellen damit ein hinreichend reliables und valides Selbstbeurteilungsverfahren zur Erfassung von Leistungskausalattributionen für Grundschulkinder der 3. und 4. Jahrgangsstufe dar, das sowohl Erfolgs- als auch Misserfolgsattributionen von Grundschulkindern differenziert erfassen kann.

Schlüsselwörter

Leistungskausalattributionen Grundschulkinder Faktorielle Validität Kriteriumsvalidität 

Scales of achievement attributions for elementary school children (SELKA-G)

Abstract

The present study introduces a new self-report measurement for elementary school children for the assessment of third and fourth graders’ achievement attributions of both success and failure in the domain of mathematics: scales for assessing achievement attributions for elementary school children (SELKA-G). Based upon data of 405 elementary school children from grades 3 and 4, the aim of this study is to examine the psychometric quality and validity of the SELKA‑G. Test-theoretical results (reliability, selectivity, retest reliability) were satisfactory. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the factor structure and scalar invariance across gender. The validity was mainly confirmed by correlations with external criteria (self-concept, grades, care of teachers). Thus, the SELKA‑G present a valid and reliable self-report measurement for the assessment of elementary school children’s success and failure attributions specifically.

Keywords

Achievement attributions Elementary school children Factorial validity Criterion validity 

Supplementary material

42010_2019_57_MOESM1_ESM.doc (75 kb)
Items der SELKA‑G für das Fach Mathematik

Literatur

  1. Arens, A. K., Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., Yeung, A. S., Randhawa, E., & Hasselhorn, M. (2016). Math self-concept in preschool children: Structure, achievement relations, and generalizability across gender. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 391–403.Google Scholar
  2. Arens, A. K., Yeung, A. S., Craven, R. G., & Hasselhorn, M. (2013). A short German version of the Self-Description Questionnaire I: theoretical and empirical comparability. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 36, 415–438.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, J. A. (2006). Contributions of teacher–child relationships to positive school adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 211–229.Google Scholar
  4. Benölken, R. (2015). Gender- and giftedness-specific differences in mathematical self-concepts, attributions and interests. Procedia. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 464–473.Google Scholar
  5. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Byrne, B. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.Google Scholar
  8. Deters, T., & Hellmich, F. (2010). Attributionsstile von Grundschulkindern und deren Erklärungsfaktoren. Zwischen Fachdidaktik und Stufendidaktik (S. 99–102). Wiesbaden: VS.Google Scholar
  9. Dickhäuser, O., & Stiensmeier-Pelster, J. (2000). Entwicklung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung computerspezifischer Attributionen. Diagnostica, 46, 103–111.Google Scholar
  10. Dresel, M. (2000). Der Einfluß der motivationalen Orientierung auf den Erfolg eines Reattributionstrainings im Unterricht. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 32, 192–206.Google Scholar
  11. Dresel, M., Schober, B., & Ziegler, A. (2005). Nothing more than dimensions? Evidence for a surplus meaning of specific attributions. The Journal of Educational Research, 99, 31–45.Google Scholar
  12. Erten, I. H., & Burden, R. L. (2014). The relationship between academic self-concept, attributions, and L2 achievement. System, 42, 391–401.Google Scholar
  13. Espinoza, P. P., Quezada, S. A., Rincones, R., Strobach, E. N., & Gutiérrez, M. A. E. (2012). Attributional bias instrument (ABI): validation of a measure to assess ability and effort explanations for math performance. Social Psychology of Education, 15, 533–554.Google Scholar
  14. Extremera, A. B., Ruiz-Juan, F., & Granero-Gallegos, A. (2016). A cross-cultural analysis in predicting 2x2 achievement goals in physical education based on social goals, perceived locus of causality and causal attribution. Studia Psychologica, 58, 74–88.Google Scholar
  15. Farid, F., & Iqbal, H. M. (2012). Causal attribution beliefs among school students in Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4, 411–424.Google Scholar
  16. Gruehn, S. (2000). Unterricht und schulisches Lernen. Schüler als Quellen der Unterrichtsbeschreibung. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  17. Hau, K. T., & Salili, F. (1993). Measurement of achievement attribution: A review of instigation methods, question contents, and measurement formats. Educational Psychology Review, 5, 377–422.Google Scholar
  18. Hosenfeld, I. (2002). Kausalitätsüberzeugungen und Schulleistungen. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  19. Hu, W., Jia, X., Plucker, J. A., & Shan, X. (2016). Effects of a critical thinking skills program on the learning motivation of primary school students. Roeper Review, 38, 70–83.Google Scholar
  20. König, J. (2011). Entwicklungsbedingungen der Misserfolgsattributionen von Schülerinnen und Schülern. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 3, 198–209.Google Scholar
  21. Krampen, G. (1987). Entwicklung von Kontrollüberzeugungen: Thesen zu Forschungsstand und Perspektiven. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 19, 195–227.Google Scholar
  22. Lefcourt, H. M., von Baeyer, C. L., Ware, E. E., & Cox, D. J. (1979). The multidimensional-multiattributional causality scale: The development of a goal specific locus of control scale. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 11, 286–304.Google Scholar
  23. Little, T. D., & Lopez, D. F. (1997a). Regularities in the development of children’s causality beliefs about school performance across six sociocultural contexts. Developmental Psychology, 33, 165–175.Google Scholar
  24. Little, T. D., & Lopez, D. F. (1997b). Regularities in the development of children’s causality beliefs about school performance across six sociocultural contexts. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 11, 286–304.Google Scholar
  25. Little, T. D., Miyashita, T., Karasawa, M., Mashima, M., Oettingen, G., Azuma, H., & Baltes, P. B. (2003). The links among action-control beliefs, intellective skill, and school performance in Japanese, US, and German school children. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 41–48.Google Scholar
  26. Little, T. D., Oettingen, G., & Baltes, P. B. (1995b). The revised control, agency, and means-ends interview (CAMI): a multicultural validity assessment using mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses. Materialen aus der Bildungsforschung, Bd. 49. Berlin: Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung.Google Scholar
  27. Little, T. D., Oettingen, G., Stetsenko, A., & Baltes, P. B. (1995a). Children’s action-control beliefs about school performance: how do American children compare with German and Russian children? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 686–700.Google Scholar
  28. Luo, W., Hogan, D. J., Yeung, A. S., Sheng, Y. Z., & Aye, K. M. (2014). Attributional beliefs of Singapore students: relations to self-construal, competence and achievement goals. Educational Psychology, 34, 154–170.Google Scholar
  29. Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Children’s relationships with adults and peers: An examination of elementary and junior high school students. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 81–99.Google Scholar
  30. Marsh, H. W. (1990). Self-description questionnaire I (SDQ I). Manual. Macarthur: University of Western Sydney.Google Scholar
  31. Marsh, H. W. (1994). Using the national longitudinal study of 1988 to evaluate theoretical models of self-concept: the self-description questionnaire. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 439–456.Google Scholar
  32. Marsh, H. W., Abduljabbar, A. S., Parker, P. D., Morin, A. J., Abdelfattah, F., Nagengast, B., Möller, J., & Abu-Hilal, M. M. (2015). The internal/external frame of reference model of self-concept and achievement relations age-cohort and cross-cultural differences. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 168–202.Google Scholar
  33. Marsh, H. W., Cairns, L., Relich, J., Barnes, J., & Debus, R. L. (1984). The relationship between dimensions of self-attribution and dimensions of self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 3–32.Google Scholar
  34. McMillan, W. (2015). Identity and attribution as lenses to understand the relationship between transition to university and initial academic performance. African Journal of Health Professions Education, 7, 32–38.Google Scholar
  35. Mijs, J. J. B. (2016). Stratified failure: Educational stratification and students’ attributions of their mathematics performance in 24 countries. Sociology of Education.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040716636434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Möller, J. (2010). Attributionen. In D. H. Rost (Hrsg.), Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie (S. 38–45). Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  37. Möller, J., & Trautwein, U. (2015). Selbstkonzept. In E. Wild & J. Möller (Hrsg.), Pädagogische Psychologie (S. 177–199). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  38. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7. Aufl.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  39. Oettingen, G., Little, T. D., Lindenberger, U., & Baltes, P. B. (1994). School performance-related causality, agency, and control beliefs in East and West Berlin children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 579–595.Google Scholar
  40. Perry, R. P., Chipperfield, J. G., Hladkyj, S., Pekrun, R., & Hamm, J. M. (2014). Attribution-based treatment interventions in some achievement settings. Advances in motivation and achievement, 18, 1–35.Google Scholar
  41. Peterson, C., Semmel, A., Von Baeyer, C., Abramson, L. Y., Metalsky, G. I., & Seligman, M. E. (1982). The attributional style questionnaire. Cognitive therapy and research, 6, 287–299.Google Scholar
  42. Poppe, P., Stiensmeier-Pelster, J., & Pelster, A. (2005). Attributionsstilfragebogen für Erwachsene (ASF–E). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  43. Pourmohamadreza-Tajrishi, M. (2014). The effectiveness of attribution retraining on anxiety of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation, 14, 30–39.Google Scholar
  44. Prawat, R. S., Grissom, S., & Parish, T. (1979). Affective development in children, grades 3 through 12. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 135, 37–49.Google Scholar
  45. Russell, D. (1982). The Causal Dimension Scale: A measure of how individuals perceive causes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 1137–1145.Google Scholar
  46. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507–514.Google Scholar
  47. Schaller, P., & Spinath, B. (2017). Selbstberichtskalen zur Erfassung motivationsbezogener Kompetenzen (MOBEKO) im Studium. Diagnostica, 63, 229–241.Google Scholar
  48. Schüpbach, M. (2000). Wie attribuieren Schülerinnen und Schüler in realen Situationen nach Prüfungen? Lizentiatsarbeit. Zürich: Pädagogisches Institut, Universität Zürich.Google Scholar
  49. Schütz, C. (2004). Leistungsbezogenes Denken hochbegabter Jugendlicher. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  50. Skinner, E. A., Chapman, M., & Baltes, P. B. (1988). Children’s beliefs about control, means-ends, and agency: developmental differences during middle childhood. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 11, 369–388.Google Scholar
  51. Stetsenko, A., Little, T. D., Oettingen, G., & Baltes, P. B. (1995). Agency, control, and means and ends beliefs about school performance in Moscow children: how similar are they to beliefs of Western children? Developmental Psychology, 31, 285–299.Google Scholar
  52. Stiensmeier-Pelster, J., Schürmann, M., Eckert, C., & Pelster, A. (1994). Attributionsstil-Fragebogen für Kinder und Jugendliche (ASF–KJ). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  53. Tirri, K., & Nokelainen, P. (2011). The influence of self-perception of abilities and attribution styles on academic choices: Implications for gifted education. Roeper Review, 33, 26–32.Google Scholar
  54. Weiber, R., & Mühlhaus, D. (2014). Strukturgleichungsmodellierung: Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung mit Hilfe von AMOS, SmartPLS und SPSS (2. Aufl.). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  55. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548–573.Google Scholar
  56. Weisz, J. R. (1980). Developmental change in perceived control: recognizing noncontingency in the laboratory and perceiving it in the world. Developmental Psychology, 16, 385–390.Google Scholar
  57. Widdel, H. (1977). Attribuierungsfragebogen für Erfolg und Mißerfolg in der Schule (AEM 5–7). Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  58. Wieman, C., & Welsh, A. (2016). The connection between teaching methods and attribution errors. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 645–648.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Die Herausgeber und Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fakultät für ErziehungswissenschaftUniversität HamburgHamburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations