Erratum

Abstract

Psychology in the SchoolsVolume 55, Issue 1 p. 101-102 ERRATUMFree Access Erratum This article corrects the following: MEASURING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY TRAINEE SELF-EFFICACY Adam B. Lockwood, John Mcclure, Karen Sealander, Courtney N. Baker, Volume 54Issue 6Psychology in the Schools pages: 655-670 First Published online: April 19, 2017 First published: 14 December 2017 https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22098AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat In the Psychology in the Schools, 54(6), 655–670, article “Measuring School Psychology Trainee Self-efficacy,” the incorrect model figure was provided, which failed to highlight the following pairs of items: a) q10 How well can you conduct crisis counseling? & q24 How well can you apply leadership skills for crisis prevention and management? b) q67 How well can you counsel individual children? & q69 How well can you use effective counseling skills? c) q3 How well can you change or add tests or other assessment procedures as a result of the information you obtain early in the assessment process? & q74 How well can you choose assessment instruments for addressing the referral concern(s)? Each of these pairs of items contains similar wording, which may introduce correlated errors between indicators (Brown, 2006). When correlated errors occur due to similar wording, it is not problematic to correlate residuals (Sosu, 2013). Due to this similarity in wording, we correlated the residuals between the above pairs of items. To provide further clarification, we have included the correct model (figure 1) showing the correlated residuals. Figure 1Open in figure viewerPowerPoint The factor structure model of the HITS tested using CFA REFERENCES Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Sosu, E. M. (2013). The development and psychometric validation of a critical thinking disposition scale. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 9, 107– 119. Volume55, Issue1Special Issue: Introduction: Incorporating culture in school-based interventionsJanuary 2018Pages 101-102 FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation