The Construct Validity of Vallerand's Academic Motivation Scale (AMS)

被引:5
|
作者
Algharaibeh, Salem Ali Salem [1 ]
机构
[1] Al Balqa Appl Univ, Ajloun Univ Coll, Dept Educ Sci, Salt, Jordan
关键词
CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS; INTRINSIC MOTIVATION; HIGH-SCHOOL; CLASSROOM; RELIABILITY; ELEMENTARY; ADAPTATION; VALIDATION; INVENTORY;
D O I
10.1155/2021/5546794
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
It seems that the academic motivation structure is affected by cultural factors. Many studies have examined the factorial structure of the academic motivation scale (AMS), and the results showed different factorial structures of AMS (e.g., Taghipour Ali Hosein et al. (EL-yazidi and Louzani, 2017) concluded that the scale consists of two dimensions; Natalya and Purwanto (2018) concluded that it consists of three dimensions; Alruaili (2020) concluded that it consists of four dimensions; Abu Awad (2009) concluded that the scale consists of six dimensions). The AMS is one of the most widely used academic motivation measures across the world. It was built on the basis of the self-determination theory. The current study aimed at investigating the factorial structure of the AMS using the exploratory factor analysis (PCA) and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The AMS was applied to a sample of 401 university students. The results of PCA suggested a three-factor solution (intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and Amotivation), and CFA was conducted for three competing structures (three factors, five factors, and seven factors); the results confirmed the three-factor solution for the AMS. The results also showed that the AMS dimensions had good alpha coefficient values which were greater than the acceptable cut-off value of 0.7. In conclusion, the Jordanian version of the AMS is a valid scale that consists of 24 items loaded on three factors (intrinsic, extrinsic, and Amotivation) for measuring academic motivation.
引用
下载
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Construct Validity and Reliability of the Learning Motivation Questionnaire
    Apriandi, Davi
    Retnawati, Heri
    Abadi, Agus Maman
    TEM JOURNAL-TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION MANAGEMENT INFORMATICS, 2022, 11 (04): : 1494 - 1499
  • [22] CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF A SCALE OF ACQUIESCENCE
    HUNDLEBY, JD
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1966, 5 (04): : 290 - 298
  • [23] CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF A SCALE OF ACQUIESCENCE
    HUNDLEBY, JD
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1966, 5 : 290 - +
  • [24] Examining the validity of the academic motivation scale by comparing scale construction to self-determination theory
    Cokley, KO
    PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS, 2000, 86 (02) : 560 - 564
  • [25] Academic motivation scale - reliability and validity evidence among undergraduate nursing students
    de Souza, Geisa Colebrusco
    Meireles, Everson
    Mira, Vera Lucia
    Januario Leite, Maria Madalena
    REVISTA LATINO-AMERICANA DE ENFERMAGEM, 2021, 29
  • [26] AN EXAMINATION OF THE VALIDITY OF THE ACADEMIC MOTIVATION SCALE WITH A UNITED STATES BUSINESS STUDENT SAMPLE
    Smith, Kenneth J.
    Davy, Jeanette A.
    Rosenberg, Donald L.
    PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS, 2010, 106 (02) : 323 - 341
  • [27] Evaluating Playfulness: Construct Validity of the Children's Playfulness Scale
    Efthimios Trevlas
    Vasilios Grammatikopoulos
    Nikolaos Tsigilis
    Evridiki Zachopoulou
    Early Childhood Education Journal, 2003, 31 (1) : 33 - 39
  • [28] Construct Validity of Almutairi's Critical Cultural Competence Scale
    Almutairi, Adel F.
    Dahinten, V. Susan
    WESTERN JOURNAL OF NURSING RESEARCH, 2017, 39 (06) : 784 - 802
  • [29] Construct validity of the Korean women's abuse intolerance scale
    Choi, Myunghan
    Phillips, Linda R.
    Figueredo, Aurelio Jose
    Insel, Katheleen
    Min, Sung-Kil
    NURSING RESEARCH, 2008, 57 (01) : 40 - 50
  • [30] Psychometric Validity and Gender Invariance of the Academic Buoyancy Scale in the Philippines: A Construct Validation Approach
    Datu, Jesus Alfonso D.
    Yang, Weipeng
    JOURNAL OF PSYCHOEDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT, 2018, 36 (03) : 278 - 283