Abstract

This study was aimed at validating the Political Action Tendencies Scale in Chilean students who attend traditional universities in the region of Valparaiso, Chile. Through a quota sampling process, 600 students of both sexes were enrolled. Theirmean age was of 20.09 years (SD = 3.02). Participants filled in a 12-item questionnaire measuring willingness to participate in several forms of political action. Two-factor and 3-factor models were tested through confirmatory factor analyses. The 3-factor model—which included non normative political action, organized political action and normative political action—displayed the best fit. Confirmatory factor analyses also supported the metric invariance of the scale by sex, religion, and political orientation, which made it possible to compare—with Student's t-test—the means of these groups in the 3 dimensions of the scale and demonstrated its discriminant validity. These findings provide evidence of the validity of the Political Action Tendencies Scale. Steps to improve this instrument include incorporating additional dimensions of political action and extending its application to other social actors.

Highlights

  • Few instruments have been suitably translated and validated for measuring motivational aspects linked to reading in the Spanish-speaking world

  • The present study was aimed at psychometrically validating the Gambrell, Palmer, Codling, and Mazzoni's Motivation to Read Survey (MTS; 1996), which comprises 2 subscales: reader's self-concept and value of reading

  • Results show that the Spanish version of the MTS is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used for research and instructional purposes, allowing researchers and teachers to delve deeper into reading motivation in Spanishspeaking children

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Few instruments have been suitably translated and validated for measuring motivational aspects linked to reading in the Spanish-speaking world. Respecto de los valores obtenidos de consistencia interna, observamos que nuestros resultados son levemente inferiores a los obtenidos por Gambrell et al (1996) en la validación del instrumento (0,71 y 0,77 versus 0,75 y 0,82 en autoconcepto lector y valor de la lectura, respectivamente).

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call