• Türkçe
    • English
  • English 
    • Türkçe
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   RTEÜ
  • Araştırma Çıktıları | TR-Dizin | WoS | Scopus | PubMed
  • Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
  • View Item
  •   RTEÜ
  • Araştırma Çıktıları | TR-Dizin | WoS | Scopus | PubMed
  • Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Comparing the automatic item selection procedure and exploratory factor analysis in determining factor structure

Thumbnail

View/Open

Full Text / Tam Metin (625.8Kb)

Access

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

Date

2022

Author

Avşar, Asiye Şengül

Metadata

Show full item record

Citation

Avsar, A.S. (2022). Comparing the Automatic Item Selection Procedure and Exploratory Factor Analysis in Determining Factor Structure. Participatory Educational Research, 9(2), 416-436. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.47.9.2

Abstract

It is necessary to supply proof regarding the construct validity of the scales. Especially, when new scales are developed the construct validity is researched by the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Generally, factor extraction is performed via the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) which is not exactly factor analysis and the Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) among EFA methods. Factors may also be determined with different techniques depending on the advances in psychometry. In the context of nonparametric item response theory, the Mokken Scale Analysis (MSA) and the Automatic Item Selection Procedure (AISP) provide significant contributions to researchers in scale development studies. The aim of the current study is to compare the AISP and the EFA methods in determining the factor structures. The Revised Life Orientation Test, whose factor structure was previously known and validated, and the draft Expectation Scale from Academics in Distance Education Scale, which was at the preliminary stage of the scale development process with the unknown factor structure, were considered in this comparison. It was determined that the consistency of the findings obtained from the EFA, and the ones obtained from the AISP provided strong evidence in ensuring the construct validity. The PAF and the AISP produced similar results in this research. The PAF results should be taken into consideration instead of the PCA, especially in scale development studies. It is recommended that the AISP and the PAF results be evaluated together for strong evidence in the investigation of construct validity in scale development studies.

Source

Participatory Educational Research

Volume

9

Issue

2

URI

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.47.9.2
https://hdl.handle.net/11436/7406

Collections

  • EĞİF, Eğitim Bilimleri Bölümü Koleksiyonu [186]
  • Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [6023]



DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
@mire NV
 

 




| Instruction | Guide | Contact |

DSpace@RTEÜ

by OpenAIRE
Advanced Search

sherpa/romeo

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeLanguageDepartmentCategoryPublisherAccess TypeInstitution AuthorThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeLanguageDepartmentCategoryPublisherAccess TypeInstitution Author

My Account

LoginRegister

Statistics

View Google Analytics Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
@mire NV
 

 


|| Guide|| Instruction || Library || Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University || OAI-PMH ||

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University, Rize, Turkey
If you find any errors in content, please contact:

Creative Commons License
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University Institutional Repository is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 Unported License..

DSpace@RTEÜ:


DSpace 6.2

tarafından İdeal DSpace hizmetleri çerçevesinde özelleştirilerek kurulmuştur.