Versión breve del Cuestionario Revisado de Proceso de Estudio-2 Factores: Un análisis psicométrico en estudiantes universitarios
Barra lateral del artículo
Detalles del artículo
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
La revista provee acceso inmediato y gratuito a sus contenidos. La publicación es gratuita y sus contenidos se distribuyen con la licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) . Los derechos de las obras publicadas en esta revista son propiedad del autor y este es libre de distribuir y difundir las mismas fuentes siempre y cuando cite correctamente la fuente de publicación, estos actos no sean con fines comerciales y no se generen obras derivadas.
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
El trabajo presenta una versión breve del inventario R-SPQ-2F, específicamente desarrollada para evaluar enfoques de aprendizaje en estudiantes universitarios de Argentina y Perú. Participaron 1511 estudiantes universitarios (52.2% argentinos; 47.8% peruanos). Se seleccionaron los ocho ítems de la versión original, inicialmente compuesta por 20 elementos, que resultaron más representativos de los enfoques de aprendizaje superficial y profundo. Luego, se realizó un juicio experto, análisis factorial exploratorio y análisis del funcionamiento diferencial de los ítems. El modelo obtenido verificó un adecuado ajuste para la muestra total y submuestras —análisis factorial confirmatorio—, adecuada invarianza factorial según país, trayecto académico, género y equivalencia entre las versiones original y breve. Los índices de consistencia interna fueron adecuados, con pequeñas diferencias entre países. Estos hallazgos poseen importantes implicancias metodológicas y prácticas. Por un lado, se trata del primer estudio que analiza evidencia intercultural directa sobre la validez del R-SPQ-2F, mediante una selección los ítems más representativos de las dimensiones medidas que, asimismo, son equivalentes para grupos culturalmente distintos. Por otro lado, se aporta una versión breve del instrumento original, con adecuadas propiedades psicométricas, apropiada para su aplicación en estudiantes universitarios de Argentina y Perú.
Citas
Anselmi, P., Colledani, D., & Robusto, E. (2019). A Comparison of classical and modern measures of internal consistency. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02714
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J. B. (2006). Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching. Higher Education Research & Development, 8(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436890080102
Biggs, J. B. (2007). Assessing student approaches to learning. Australian Psychologist, 23(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/00050068808255604
Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. McGraw Hill.
Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., & Leung, D.Y.P. (2010). The Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158433
Breitsohl, H., & Steidelmüller, C. (2017), The impact of insufficient effort responding detection methods on substantive responses: results from an experiment testing parameter invariance. Applied Psychology, 67, 284-308. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12121
Cetin, B. (2016). Approaches to learning and age in predicting college students´ academic achievement. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 21-28. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v13i1.9568
Davidov, E., Schmidt, P., Billiet, J., & Meuleman, B. (2018). Cross-cultural analysis. Methods and applications. Routledge.
Dimitrov, D. M. (2017). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43(2), 121-149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175610373459
Entwistle, N. (2021). Research into learning and teaching in universities. In H. Huijser, M. Kek, & F. F. Padró (Eds.), Student Support Services (pp. 1–21). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3364-4_37-1
Entwistle, N., McCune, V., & Tait, H. (2013). Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/50390092_Approaches_to_learning_and_studying_inventory_ASSIST_3rd_edition
Eskandari, N., Simbar, M., Vadadhir, A. A., & Baghestani, A. R. (2016). Exploring the lived experience, meaning and imperatives of fatherhood: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Global Journal of Health Science, 8(9), 139. https://doi.org/10.5539/gjhs.v8n9p139
Freiberg-Hoffmann, A., & Fernández-Liporace, M. (2016). Learning approaches in argentinian university students, according to R-SPQ-2F: Analysis of their psychometric properties. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 25(2), 307-329. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v25n2.51874
Freiberg-Hoffmann, A., Stover, S., de la Iglesia, G., & Fernández-Liporace, M. (2013). Correlaciones policóricas y tetracóricas en estudios factoriales. Ciencias Psicológicas, 7(2), 151-164.
Grant, J. S., & Davis, L. L. (1998). Selection and use of content specialists for instrument development. Research in Nursing & Health, 20, 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199706)20:3<269::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-g.
Güller, N., & Penfield, R. D. (2009). A comparison of logistic regression and contingency table methods for simultaneous detection of uniform and nonuniform DIF. Journal of Educational Measurement, 46, 314-329. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2009.00083.x
Guo, J., Yang, L., & Shi, Q. (2017). Effects of perceptions of the learning environment and approaches to learning on Chinese undergraduates’ learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 55, 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.09.002
Gwet, K. L. (2014). Handbook of Inter-Rater Reliability (4th. ed.). Advanced Analytics, LLC.
Hammer, J. H. (2016, October). Construct replicability calculator: A Microsoft Excel-based tool to calculate the Hancock and Mueller (2001) H index. Retrieved from http://DrJosephHammer.com/
Holgado-Tello, F. P., Morata-Ramírez, M. Á., & Barbero-García, M. I. (2018). Confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables: Simulation study H comparing the main estimation methods. Advances in Latin American Psychology, 36(3),601-617. https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.4932
Huang, J. L., Liu, M., & Bowling, N. A. (2015). Insufficient effort responding: examining an insidious confounding survey data. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 828-845. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038510
Immekus, J. C., & Imbrie, P. K. (2009). A test and cross-validation of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire factor structure among western university students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(3), 495–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164409355685
Janeiro, I. N., Duarte, A. M., Araújo, A. M., & Gomes, A. I. (2017). Time perspective, approaches to learning, and academic achievement in secondary students. Learning and Individual Differences, 55, 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.03.007
Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (1998). The dimensionality of approaches to learning: an investigation with confirmatory factor analysis on the structure of the SPQ and LPQ. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(3), 395–407. https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/20448279/1998/68/3
Khine, M. S., & Afari, E. (2018). Cross-cultural adaptation of R-SPQ-2F: validation and psychometric properties. International Journal of Quantitative Research, 4(3), 255-268. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijqre.2018.092333
Koğar, H. (2020). Development of a short form: methods, examinations and recommendations. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 11(3), 301-310. https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.739548
Lai, J. S., Teresi, J., & Gershon, R. (2005). Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 28(3), 283-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278705278276
Lavidas, K., & Gialamas, V. (2019). Adaption and psychometric properties of the short forms Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale with a sample of greek university students. European Journal of Education Studies, 6(8), 230-239. http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3552531
Leung, D. Y. P. (2006, July). Cultural specificity of approaches to learning: evidence from data in five countries. Paper presented at the 36th Annual SCUTREA Conference, Trinity and All Saints College, Leads.
Levy, P. (1967). The correction for spurious correlation in the evaluation of short-form tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 84-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(196701)23:1<84::aid-jclp2270230123>3.0.co;2-2
Lozano-Lozano, J. A., Chacón-Moscoso, S., Sanduvete-Chaves, S., & Holgado-Tello, F. P. (2021). Work Climate Scale in emergency services: Abridged Version. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(12), 6495. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18126495
Marsh, H. W., Morin, A. J. S., Parker, P. D., & Kaur, G. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modeling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 85-110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153700
Martinelli, V., & Raykov, M. (2017). Evaluation of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) for student teacher approaches to learning. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 7(2), 9-12. https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2017.v7n2p9
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Merino-Soto, C., & Kumar-Pradhan, R. (2013). Validación estructural del R-SPQ-2F: un análisis factorial confirmatorio. Revista Digital de Investigación En Docencia Universitaria,7(1), 111. https://doi.org/10.19083/ridu.7.190
Merino-Soto, C., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (2003). Comparación estadística de la confiabilidad alfa de Cronbach: aplicaciones en la medición educacional y psicológica. Revista de Psicología de la Universidad de Chile, 12(2), 129-139. https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-0581.2003.17668
Mantel, N. (1963). Chi-Square Tests with One Degree of Freedom: Extensions of the Mantel-Haenszel Procedure. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58, 690-700. https://doi.org/10.2307/2282717
Penfield, R. D. (2005). DIFAS: Differential Item Functioning Analysis System. Computer Program Exchange. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29(2), 150-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621603260686
Penfield, R. D. (2007). Assessing differential step functioning in polytomous items using a common odds ratio estimator. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44(3), 187-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2007.00034.x
Penfield, R. D., & Algina, J. (2006). Applying the Liu-Agresti estimator of the cumulative common odds ratio to DIF detection in polytomous items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40(4), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2003.tb01151.x
Petrides, K. V., Jackson, C. J., Furnham, A., & Levine, S. Z. (2010). Exploring issues of personality measurement and structure through the development of a short form of the Eysenck personality profiler. Journal of Personality Assessment, 81, 271-280. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8103_10
Putnam, S. P., & Rothbart, M. K. (2010). Development of short and very short forms of the Children’s Behavior Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 103-133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8701_09
Putnick, D., & Bornstein, M. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
Robinson, M. A. (2017). Using multi-item psychometric scales for research and practice in human resource management. Human Resource Management, 57(3), 739–750. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21852
Romero-Medina, A., Hidalgo-Montesinos, M. D., González, J., Carrillo-Verdejo, E, Pedraja, M. J., García-Sevilla, J., & Pérez-Sánchez, M. A. (2013). Enfoques de aprendizaje en estudiantes universitarios: comparación de resultados con los cuestionarios ASSIST y R-SPQ-2F. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 31(2), 375-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/rie.31.2.151851
Schumaker, R., & Lomax, R. (2016). Structural equation modeling. Routledge.
Sideridis, G., Saddaawi, A., & Al-Harbi, K. (2018). Internal consistency reliability in measurement: Aggregate and multilevel approaches. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1530027194
Smith, G. T., McCarthy, D. M., & Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12, 102-111. https://doi.org/10.1037//1040-3590.12.1.102
Sohrabi, N. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Revived Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 910–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.034
Stes, A., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2013). Examining the cross-cultural sensitivity of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) and validation of a Dutch version. PLoS ONE, 8(1), e54099. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054099
Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST. A reconceptualization of the Approaches to Studying Inventory. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving students as learners (pp. 262-271). Oxford Bookes University.
Takase, M., Imai, T., Niitani, M., & Okada, M. (2019). Teaching context contributing to nursing students’ adoption of a deep approach to learning. Journal of Professional Nursing, 35, 379-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2019.04.006
Takase, M., & Yoshida, I. (2021). The relationships between the types of learning approaches used by undergraduate nursing students and their academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Professional Nursing, 37(5), 836–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.06.005
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach´s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
Vergara-Hernández, C., Simancas-Pallares, M., & Carbonell-Muñoz, Z. (2019). Psychometric properties of the Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire R-SPQ-2F – Spanish version. Duazary, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.21676/2389783X.2744
Viladrich, C., Angulo-Brunet, A., & Doval, E. (2017). Un viaje alrededor de alfa y omega para estimar la fiabilidad de consistencia interna. Anales de Psicología, 33(3), 755. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.33.3.268401
Zakariya, Y. F., Bjørkestøl, K., Nilsen, H. K., Goodchild, S., & Lorås, M. (2020). University students’ learning approaches: An adaptation of the revised two-factor study process questionnaire to Norwegian. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100816
Zumbo, B. D., Gadermann, A. M., & Zeisser, C. (2007). Ordinal versions of coefficients alpha and theta for likert rating scales. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 6(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1177992180