The Cooperative Classroom Environment Measure (CCEM): Refining a Measure that Assesses Factors Motivating Student Prosociality

  • Joshua PremoEmail author
  • Andy Cavagnetto
  • Richard Lamb


A classroom’s social environment and student dispositions towards social interaction together exert a substantial influence on academic outcomes. The strength of this effect is highlighted by research showing the positive effect of cooperative learning on student achievement, but can also be seen in the contribution that student social dispositions, specifically one’s disposition toward helping others (i.e. prosocial), has on individual achievement. The current study sought to assess the psychometric properties of the original Cooperative Classroom Environment Measure (CCEM) and refine the measure to increase its validity for use in the classroom. The CCEM was developed to provide information to educators about factors in the classroom environment contributing to student prosociality. The original form was answered by 431 undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory life science class. Following data collection, both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Rasch analysis were used to remove problematic items and generate a refined form. The psychometric properties of this refined form were examined using Rasch and confirmatory factor analysis, and supported the presence of six (out of eight originally hypothesized) subscale constructs analogous to those influencing prosociality in other contexts. Additional evidence showed the presence of a single prominent underlying latent factor (termed Prosocial) that could account for significant variance in all subscale constructs. These findings provided preliminary evidence for the use of both the CCEM subscales and whole survey measures for investigations into optimizing classroom social environments for prosocial action.


Classroom assessment Cooperation Prosocial Undergraduate 

Supplementary material

10763_2017_9804_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
Supplemental Table 1 Factor analysis loading following final item removals (ML, Promax rotation) (DOCX 17 kb)
10763_2017_9804_MOESM2_ESM.docx (14 kb)
Supplemental Table 2 Descriptives for final subscales (DOCX 13 kb)


  1. Balliet, D., Mulder, L. B. & Van Lange, P. A. (2011). Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 137(4), 594-615.Google Scholar
  2. Balliet, D. & Van Lange, P. A. (2013). Trust, punishment, and cooperation across 18 societies a meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(4), 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Batson, C. D. & Powell, A. A. (2003). Altruism and prosocial behavior.  In T. Millon & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 5, pp.463-484). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. doi: 10.1002/0471264385.wei0519
  4. Beavers, A., Lounsbury, J., Richards, J., Huck, S., Skolits, G. & Esquivel, S. (2013). Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 18(6), 1–13.Google Scholar
  5. Berndt, T. J. (1985). Prosocial behavior between friends in middle childhood and early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 5(3), 307–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berndt, T. J., Hawkins, J. A. & Hoyle, S. G. (1986). Changes in friendship during a school year: Effects on children’s and adolescents’ impressions of friendship and sharing with friends. Child Development, 57, 1284–1297.Google Scholar
  7. Boling, E. C., Holan, E., Horbatt, B., Hough, M., Jean-Louis, J., Khurana, C. & Spiezio, C. (2014). Using online tools for communication and collaboration: Understanding educators’ experiences in an online course. The Internet and Higher Education, 23, 48–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bond, T. G. & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Boone, W. J., Townsend, J. S. & Staver, J. (2011). Using Rasch theory to guide the practice of survey development and survey data analysis in science education and to inform science reform efforts: An exemplar utilizing STEBI self-efficacy data. Science Education, 95, 258–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. (1998). Model selection and inference: A practical information-theoretic approach. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Pastorelli, C., Bandura, A. & Zimbardo, P. G. (2000). Prosocial foundations of children’s academic achievement. Psychological Science, 11(4), 302–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Caprara, G. V., Kanacri, B. P. L., Gerbino, M., Zuffianò, A., Alessandri, G., Vecchio, G. & Bridglall, B. (2014). Positive effects of promoting prosocial behavior in early adolescence evidence from a school-based intervention. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(4), 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caprara, G. V. & Pastorelli, C. (1993). Early emotional instability, prosocial behaviour, and aggression: Some methodological aspects. European Journal of Personality, 7(1), 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carter, G. (2014). The reciprocity controversy. Animal Behavior and Cognition, 1(3), 368–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Curran, P. J., West, S. G. & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 16-29.Google Scholar
  17. Diamantopoulos, A., Siguaw, J. A. & Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Introducing LISREL: A guide for the uninitiated. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Dimitrov, D. M. (2012). Statistical methods for validation of assessment scale data in counseling and related fields. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.Google Scholar
  19. Eisenberg, N. & Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101(1), 91-119.Google Scholar
  20. Engelmann, J. M., Over, H., Herrmann, E. & Tomasello, M. (2013). Young children care more about their reputation with ingroup members and potential reciprocators. Developmental Science, 16(6), 952–958.Google Scholar
  21. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C. & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272-299.Google Scholar
  22. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. George, D. & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  24. Gurven, M. (2004). To give and to give not: The behavioral ecology of human food transfers. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(04), 543–559.Google Scholar
  25. Haley, K. J. & Fessler, D. M. (2005). Nobody’s watching?: Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(3), 245–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hambleton, R. K. & Lam, W. (2009). Redesign of MCAS tests based on a consideration of information functions (MCAS Validity Report No. 18; CEA-689). Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, Center for Educational Assessment.Google Scholar
  27. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.Google Scholar
  28. Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hutcheson, G. D. & Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist: Introductory statistics using generalized linear models. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R. T., Nelson, D. & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kato-Shimizu, M., Onishi, K., Kanazawa, T. & Hinobayashi, T. (2013). Preschool children’s behavioral tendency toward social indirect reciprocity. PloS One, 8(8), e70915. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070915
  33. Kraft-Todd, G., Yoeli, E., Bhanot, S. & Rand, D. (2015). Promoting cooperation in the field. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 96–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kurzban, R., Burton-Chellew, M. N. & West, S. A. (2015). The evolution of altruism in humans. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 575–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kyndt, E., Raes, E., Lismont, B., Timmers, F., Cascallar, E. & Dochy, F. (2013). A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educational Research Review, 10, 133–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lamb, R. L., Annetta, L., Meldrum, J. & Vallett, D. (2012). Measuring science interest: Rasch validation of the science interest survey. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(3), 643-668.Google Scholar
  37. Lamb, R. L., Vallett, D. & Annetta, L. (2014). Development of a short-form measure of science and technology self-efficacy using Rasch analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(5), 641-657.Google Scholar
  38. Leimgruber, K. L., Shaw, A., Santos, L. R. & Olson, K. R. (2012). Young children are more generous when others are aware of their actions. PLoS One, 7(10), e48292–e48292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Linacre, J. M. (1997). KR-20/Cronbach alpha or Rasch person reliability: which tells the “truth”? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 11(3), 580–581. Retrieved from
  40. Linacre, J. M. (2002a). Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3(1), 85–106.Google Scholar
  41. Linacre, J. M. (2002b). What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean?, Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16(2), 878. Retrieved from
  42. Linacre, J. M. (2009a). Practical Rasch measurement—Core topics [Online course]. Retrieved from
  43. Linacre, J. M. (2009b). WINSTEPS [Software and user’s guide]. Chicago, IL: Winsteps.Google Scholar
  44. Markiewicz, D., Doyle, A. B. & Brendgen, M. (2001). The quality of adolescents’ friendships: Associations with mothers’ interpersonal relationships, attachments to parents and friends, and prosocial behaviors. Journal of Adolescence, 24(4), 429–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Martin, A. & Olson, K. R. (2015). Beyond good and evil what motivations underlie children’s prosocial behavior? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Massen, J. J., Sterck, E. H. & de Vos, H. (2010). Close social associations in animals and humans: Functions and mechanisms of friendship. Behaviour, 147(11), 1379–1412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McGuire, K. D. & Weisz, J. R. (1982). Social cognition and behavioral correlates of preadolescent chumship. Child Development, 53, 1478–1484Google Scholar
  48. Meade, A. W. & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological methods, 17(3), 437-455.Google Scholar
  49. Melis, A. P. & Semmann, D. (2010). How is human cooperation different? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 365(1553), 2663–2674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Muthèn, B. & Kaplan, D. (1992). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non‐normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45(1), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nowak, M. A. (2006). Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science, 314(5805), 1560–1563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ostrom, E. (2015). Governing the commons. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A. & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rabaglietti, E., Vacirca, M. F. & Pakalniskiene, W. (2014). Social-emotional competence and friendships: Prosocial behaviour and lack of behavioural self-regulation as predictors of quantity and quality of friendships in middle childhood. European Journal of Child development, Education and Psychopathology, 1(1), 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rand, D. G. & Nowak, M. A. (2013). Human cooperation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(8), 413–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Danmarks Paedagogiske Institute.Google Scholar
  57. Roseth, C. J., Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (2008). Promoting early adolescents’ achievement and peer relationships: The effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures. Psychological bulletin, 134(2), 223-246.Google Scholar
  58. Ruff, C. C. & Fehr, E. (2014). The neurobiology of rewards and values in social decision making. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(8), 549–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schmitter-Edgecombe, M., Parsey, C. & Lamb, R. (2014). Development and psychometric properties of the instrumental activities of daily living: Compensation scale. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 29, 776–792.Google Scholar
  60. Stewart, B., Tennant, A., Tennant, R., Platt, S., Parkinson, J. & Weich, S. (2009). Internal construct validity of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scake: A Rasch analysis using data from the Scottish Health Education Population Survey. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 7(15), 1–8.Google Scholar
  61. Trivers, R. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Reviews of Biology, 46, 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P. & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 486–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wentzel, K. R., Barry, C. M. & Caldwell, K. A. (2004). Friendships in middle school: Influences on motivation and school adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 195-203.Google Scholar
  64. Wilson, D. S., Kauffman Jr, R. A. & Purdy, M. S. (2011). A program for at-risk high school students informed by evolutionary science. PloS One, 6(11), e27826.Google Scholar
  65. Wilson, D. S., Ostrom, E. & Cox, M. E. (2013). Generalizing the core design principles for the efficacy of groups. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 90, S21–S32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wright, B. D. (1968, February). Sample-free test calibration and person measurement. Paper presented at the National Seminar on Adult Education Research, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  67. Wright, B. D. (1984). Despair and hope for educational measurement. Contemporary Education Review, 3(1), 281–288.Google Scholar
  68. Wright, B. D. & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best test design. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.Google Scholar
  69. Zuffianò, A., Alessandri, G., Kanacri, B. P. L., Pastorelli, C., Milioni, M., Ceravolo, R. & Caprara, G. V. (2014). The relation between prosociality and self-esteem from middle-adolescence to young adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 63, 24–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  2. 2.Department of Teaching and LearningWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  3. 3.Department of Learning and InstructionUniversity at BuffaloBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations