응답자 특성에 따른 신체적 자기개념 검사지의 범주반응기능 검사
Category Response Functions of the Physical Self Description Questionnaire-Short According to the Characteristics of the Respondents
1
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
이 연구에서는 한국어판 신체적 자기개념 검사지의 6점 척도가 응답자의 특성에 따라 다양하게 작용하는지 여부를 비교하였다. 연령과 교육수준에서 차이를 갖고 있는 세 집단(고등학생 397명, 대학생 437명, 노인 242명)으로부터 수집된 자료는 Rasch 평정척도모형을 이용하여 각각 분석되었다. 반응척도 범주기능 검사 결과, 고등학생과 대학생자료에서는 6점 척도가 적합하게 작용하는 것으로 나타났다. 노인자료에서는 임계값 역순현상이 발견되었으며 문제가 있는 세 번째 범주를 인근 범주와 여러 가지 조합으로 병합하여 범주기능을 재검사하였다. 결과에 따르면 세 번째와 네 번째 범주를 병합한 5점 척도의 범주기능이 가장 적합하였으며 분리지수와 신뢰도계수도 가장 양호한 것으로 나타났다. 요약하면, 동일한 반응척도이더라도 응답자의 특성에 따라 다르게 인지될 수 있다. 그러므로 검사지를 이용한 측정에서 대상의 특성을 고려하지 않고 획일적인 척도를 적용하는 것은 수집된 자료의 질을 저하시킬 수 있다는 점에 주의를 기울여야 한다.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to test the category function of the Likert 6-point scale employed for the translated version of the Physical Self Description Questionnaire-Short. Rasch rating scale model was applied to the analyses and the guidelines recommended by Linacre (2002) were utilized as criteria. Data were obtained from three groups with unique characteristics; 397 high school students (HS), 437 undergraduates (UG), and 242 old adults (OA). Interest was mainly focused on investigating whether the category functions vary depending on the characteristics of the respondents. Disordered step calibration was found in OA data then OA data were recalibrated repeatedly with several combinations of collapsing procedure applied. Based on the results, the 5-point scale (categories 3 & 4 combined) was considered optimal for OA while 6-point scale seemed to function appropriately for HS and UG. It should be considered with caution when the unified form of response options is applied to a heterogeneous group of people and/or to respondents with various characteristics.
참고문헌 (28)
- 배진경, "창작발레연기력의 평정척도개발과 최적범주", 한국체육학회지, 42(1), pp.499~508 (2003), 한국체육학회
- 서현규, "한국어판 신체적 자기개념 검사도구의 심리측정학적 특성", 석사, pp.2011
- 정혁, "Rasch 모형: 서열척도 분석의 대안적 방법", 코칭능력개발지, 7(3), pp.133~141 (2005), 한국코칭능력개발원
- 정혁, "한국어판 신체적 자기효능감 척도의 문항 및 범주기능 검사", 한국체육측정평가학회지, 11(3), pp.67~75 (2009), 한국체육측정평가학회
- 정혁, "Rasch 평정척도 모형을 이용한 외향성 척도 분석", 한국 스포츠 리서치, 16(5), pp.949~956 (2005), 한국스포츠리서치
- 조정환, "Rasch 모형에 의한 여대생 운동방해 요인 평가", 한국체육측정평가학회지, 4, pp.1~13 (2002), 한국체육측정평가학회
- Andrich,D, "A rating formulation for ordered response categories", Psychometrika, 43, pp.561~573 (1978)
- Andrich,D, "Rasch models for measurement" (1988), Sage
- Baghaei, P., "The effects of the number of options on the psychometric characteristics of multiple choice items", Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 53, pp.192~211 (2011)
- Baker, F. B, "The basics of item response theory" (1985), Heinemann
- Bond, T. G., "Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.)" (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum
- DeVellis, R. F, "Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed.)" (2003), Sage
- Gothwal, V. K., "Rasch analysis of the quality of life and vision function questionnaire", Optometry & Vision Science, 86(7), pp.836~844 (2009)
- Guilford,J.P, "Psychometric methods (2nd ed.)" (1954), McGraw-Hill
- Linacre, J. M, "Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness", Journal of Applied Measurement, 3, pp.85~106 (2002)
- Linacre,J.M, "A user’s guide to WINSTEPS MINISTEPS: Rasch-model computer programs" (2004), Winsteps.com
- Looney, M. A, "Objective measurement of figure skating performance", Journal of Outcome Measurement, 1, pp.143~163 (1997)
- Marsh, H. W., "Introducing a short version of the physical self description questionnaire: New strategies, short-form evaluative criteria, and applications of factor analyses", Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 32, pp.438~482 (2010)
- Parducci, A., "The category effect with rating scales: Number of categories, number of stimuli, and method of presentation", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12, pp.496~516 (1986)
- Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests, "Rasch,G", Danish Institute for Educational Research, ~ (1960)
- Rasch, G, "Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests (with forward and afterward by B. D. Wrgiht)" (1980), University of Chicago Press
- Reckase, M. D, "Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications", Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, pp.207~230 (1979)
- Thissen, D., "Item response theory for items scored in more than two categories, in Test scoring", pp.141~186 (2001), Lawrence Erlbaum
- Wedell, D. H., "Reducing the dependence of clinical judgment on the immediate context: Effects of number of categories and type of anchors", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, pp.319~329 (1990)
- Zhu, W., "Many-faceted Rasch calibration of a gross motor instrument", Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, pp.24~34 (1996)
- Zhu, W., "Cross-cultural stability of the optimal categorization of a self-efficacy scale: A Rasch analysis", Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 2, pp.225~241 (1998)
- Zhu, W., "Rasch partial credit analysis of gross motor competence", Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, pp.947~961 (1994)
- Zhu, W., "Rasch calibration and optimal categorization of an instrument measuring women’s exercise perseverance and barriers", Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 72, pp.104~116 (2001)