A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Self-Efficacy as a Resilience Measure: Evidence From PISA 2018

S. Kaya, Nurullah Eryilmaz, Dogan Yuksel
{"title":"A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Self-Efficacy as a Resilience Measure: Evidence From PISA 2018","authors":"S. Kaya, Nurullah Eryilmaz, Dogan Yuksel","doi":"10.1177/0044118x231186833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study explored the equivalence of resilience across countries and economies that participated in PISA 2018. A total of 79 countries and economies were divided into ten sub-groups based on their socio-demographic characteristics. Analysis of the comparability of the PISA self-efficacy scale as a measure of resilience across the participating countries/economies in the study was conducted using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MG-CFA). The results demonstrated that across all countries and economies, the configural invariance level, which is the lowest level of invariance, has been reached but the metric and scalar invariance levels have not been reached. Within-group results showed that all sub-groups presented a model fit for the metric level of invariance. However, only the Anglo countries were able to reach the strict invariance level. This finding indicates that the Anglo countries were more homogeneous in terms of their interpretation of self-efficacy in PISA, whereas other sub-groups were more heterogeneous. Confirming the notion of cultural affiliation of resilience, it was concluded that self-efficacy by itself might not be an adequate indicator of resilience. The current study has some recommendations for future research and how PISA can be more inclusive about the constructs it employs.","PeriodicalId":118463,"journal":{"name":"Youth & Society","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Youth & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118x231186833","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study explored the equivalence of resilience across countries and economies that participated in PISA 2018. A total of 79 countries and economies were divided into ten sub-groups based on their socio-demographic characteristics. Analysis of the comparability of the PISA self-efficacy scale as a measure of resilience across the participating countries/economies in the study was conducted using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MG-CFA). The results demonstrated that across all countries and economies, the configural invariance level, which is the lowest level of invariance, has been reached but the metric and scalar invariance levels have not been reached. Within-group results showed that all sub-groups presented a model fit for the metric level of invariance. However, only the Anglo countries were able to reach the strict invariance level. This finding indicates that the Anglo countries were more homogeneous in terms of their interpretation of self-efficacy in PISA, whereas other sub-groups were more heterogeneous. Confirming the notion of cultural affiliation of resilience, it was concluded that self-efficacy by itself might not be an adequate indicator of resilience. The current study has some recommendations for future research and how PISA can be more inclusive about the constructs it employs.
自我效能作为弹性测量的跨文化比较:来自PISA 2018的证据
这项研究探讨了参加2018年国际学生评估项目的国家和经济体之间的弹性等效性。共有79个国家和经济体根据其社会人口特征分为10个分组。使用多组验证性因子分析(MG-CFA)对PISA自我效能量表作为研究中参与国家/经济体弹性测量的可比性进行了分析。结果表明,在所有国家和经济体中,已经达到了最低的不变性水平——结构不变性水平,而尚未达到度量和标量不变性水平。组内结果表明,所有子组都呈现出适合度量不变性水平的模型。然而,只有盎格鲁国家能够达到严格的不变性水平。这一发现表明,就PISA中对自我效能感的解释而言,盎格鲁国家更为同质,而其他亚组则更为异质。为了证实弹性的文化归属概念,本研究得出结论,自我效能本身可能不是弹性的充分指标。目前的研究对未来的研究提出了一些建议,以及PISA如何在其采用的结构上更具包容性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信