Figure 1. Science-specific factors that interfere with accurate self-report
Table 1. Research participants
Table 2. Analysis materials
Table 3. Contents of questionnaire
Table 4. Contents of questions for semi-structured interview
Table 5. Number of scenes, concepts, categories derived from students’ interview
Table 6. Categories and concepts derived from student interviews
Table 7. Students’ perception toward science
Table 8. Students’ negative or intermediate response to the ‘general value of science’ items with high affective achievement
Table 9. Item fit analysis on ‘general value of science’ by Rasch model
Table 10. Some cases of students’ responses with ‘personal science experience’
Table 11. Distribution of students in career course by level of instrumental motivation score in science
Table 12. Group differences of affective⋅cognitive achievement and psychological scale according to level of instrumental motivation score in science
Table 13. Cases of students’ responses with ‘science in test tool’
Table 14. Distribution of students related to specific science area or subjects in science-related affective test
Table 15. Group differences by specific science area related to groups in affective achievement
Table 16. Inter-item consistency by subconstructs in specific science area related to groups
참고문헌
- Abd-El-Khalick, F., Summers, R., Said, Z., Wang, S., & Culbertson, M. (2015). Development and large-scale validation of an instrument to assess Arabic-speaking students' attitudes toward science. International Journal of Science Education, 37(16), 2637-2663. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1098789
- Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing(6th ed.). New York: Macmillan & Co.
- Au, Y. (2007). A search on social desirability according to administered mode and demonstrable condition of a psychology testing. Journal of Educational Evaluation, 20(4), 235-258.
- Bae, B., Lee, D., & Ham, K. (2015). Validation of the Korean short-version of social desirability scale(SDS-9) using the Rasch model. Korean Journal of Counseling, 16(6), 177-197.
- Brunetti, D., Schlottmann, R., Scott, A., & Hollrah, J. (1998). Instructed faking and MMPI-2 response latencies: The potential for assessing response validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 143-153. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199802)54:2<143::AID-JCLP3>3.0.CO;2-T
- Choi, J., Hwang, S., Pai, D., Hwang, S. T., & Kim, Y. (2015). Diagnostic efficiency of personality disorder screening tool; The Korean version of self-report standardized assessment of personality-abbreviated scale: preliminary validation study. Journal of the Korean Neuropsychiatric Association, 54(4), 534-541. https://doi.org/10.4306/jknpa.2015.54.4.534
- Chun, E., Na, J., Joung, Y., & Song, J. (2015). Development and application of the measuring instrument for the analysis of science classroom culture from the perspective of ‘community of practice'. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(1), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.1.0131
- Chung, S., & Shin, D. (2016). Trends of assessment research in science education, Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(4), 563-579. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.4.0563
- Chung, S., & Shin, D. (2017). Cases of discrepancy in high school students' achievement in science education assessment: Focusing on testing tool in affective area. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(5), 891-909. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.5.891
- Cronbach, L. (1946). Response sets and test validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6(3), 475-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316444600600405
- Crowne, D., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349-354. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047358
- Ferrando, P., & Chico, E. (2001). Detecting dissimulation in personality test scores: A comparison between person-fit indices and detection scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 997-1012. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131640121971617
- Fives, H., Huebner, W., Birnbaum, A., & Nicolich, M. (2014). Developing a measure of scientific literacy for middle school students. Science Education, 98(4), 549-580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21115
- George, M., & Skinner, H. (1990). Using response latency to detecting accurate response in a computerized lifestyle assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 6, 167-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/0747-5632(90)90004-Z
- Holden, R., & Hibbs, N. (1995). International validity of response latencies for detecting fakers on a personality test. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 362-372. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1995.1021
- Holden, R., & Kroner, D. (1992). Relative efficacy of differential response latencies for detecting faking on a self-report measure of psychopathology. Psychological Assessment, 4, 170-173. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.2.170
- Holden, R., Kroner, D., Fekken, G., & Popham, S. (1992). A model of personality test item response dissimulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 272-279. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.2.272
- Hong, S. (1994). Interaction between science and technology: Technology as knowledge and science as practice. The Quarterly Changbi, 22(4), 329-350.
- Hough, L., Eaton, N., Dunnette, M., Kamp, J., & McCloy, R. (1990). Criterion-related validity of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 581-595. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.581
- Hsu, L., Sanetelli, J., & Hsu, J. (1989). Faking detection validity and incremental validity of response latencies to MMPI subtle and obvious items. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 278-295. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5302_6
- Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1985). The instability of response sets. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1086/268918
- Joo, Y., Kim, Y., Jeong, S., Shin, M., & Lee, C. (2001). Relationships between subjective symptoms and objective psychopathology in patients with schizophrenia. Journal of the Korean Neuropsychiatric Association, 40(4), 667-678.
- Kim, S., & Kim, H. (2016). Development of a science ethicality test for elementary school students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.1.0001
- Kim, H., & Lee, S. (1996). Secondary students' attitudes toward science-technology related issues in Korea. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 16(4), 461-469.
- Kim, M., & Lee, H. (2006). A study of faking on normative and ipsative measures of personality for personnel selection. The Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 19(3), 371-393.
- Kim, J., Jeong, H., Kim, Y., & Cho, Y. (2015). A study on application of NCS recruiting systems in public organization - based on NCS recruiting performance during the first half year in 2015. Journal of Skills and Qualifications, 4(1), 65-84.
- Kim, Y., Park, Y., Park, H., Shin, D., Jung, J., & Song, S. (2014). World of science education. Seoul: Book's hill.
- Kluger, A. Reilly, R., & Russell, C. (1991). Faking biodata tests: Are option-keyed instruments more resistant? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 889-896. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.6.889
- Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of NOS questionnaire toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of NOS. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
- Lee, J., & Moon, S. (2015). An analysis on the university entrance examination system's change process and main contents of occasional-regular admissions. Comtemporary Educational Research, 27, 97-130.
- Lee, M., Sohn, W., & No, U. (2007). The Results from PISA 2006. Seoul: Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation.
- Linacre, J. (2005). A user's guide to Winsteps Rasch-model computer programs. Retrieved from www.winsteps.com.
- London, M. (1997). London's career motivation theory: An update on measurement and research. Journal of Career Assessment, 5(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/106907279700500105
- Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.2.63
- McDaniel, M., & Timm, H. (1990). Lying takes time: Predicting deception in biodata using response latency. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Convention, Boston.
- Messick, S. (1991). Psychology and methodology of response styles. In R. E. Snow, & D. E. Willey (Eds.), Improving inquires in social science(pp. 161-200). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Messick, S. (1995). Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1995.tb00881.x
- Munsterberg, H. (1908). On the witness stand: Essays on psychology and crime. New York: Doubleday, Page & Co.
- National Science Teachers Association(NSTA) (2000). NSTA position statement of the nature of science. Retrieved July 12 2003, from http://www.nsta.org/159&psid=22
- Noe, R., & Ford, J. (1992). Emerging issues and new directions for training research. In G. Ferris, & K. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management(pp. 345-384). Greenwich. CT: JAI Press.
- Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Tytler, R. (2009). Attitudes towards science: An update. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, California.
- Paulhus, D. (1984). Two component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 589-609. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.598
- Paulhus, D. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding: The evolution of a construct. In H. I. Braum, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement(pp. 49-69). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erbaum Associates.
- Pickering, A. (1992). Science as practice and culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
- Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: teaching socio-scientific issues. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill International.
- Reise, S. P., & Flannery, W. P. (1996). Assessing person-fit on measures of typical performance. Applied Measurement in Education, 9(1), 9-26. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0901_3
- Rust, J., & Golombok, S. (2014). Modern psychometrics: The science of psychological assessment(3rd). London: Routledge.
- Scheuneman, J. D. (1984). A theoretical framework for the exploration of causes and effects of bias in testing. Educational Psychologist, 19(4), 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461528409529298
- Schluf, Boaz, Hattie, J., & Dixon, R. (2008). Factors affecting responses to Likert type questionnaires: Introduction of the ImpExp, a new comprehensive model. Social Psychology of Education, 11(1), 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-007-9035-x
- Schwartz, R., Lederman, N., & Crawford, B. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in authentic context: An explicit approach of bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610-645. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10128
- Seol, H., Kim, D., & Lee, S. (2006). Validation of the emotional empathy scale using Rasch rating scale model. Journal of Education Evaluation, 19(2), 179-201.
- Shin, S. Ha, M., & Lee, J. (2014). Difference analysis between groups and the generalizability of the instrument for measuring high school students attitude toward convergence. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 14(5), 107-124.
- Shin, S., Ha, M., & Lee, J. (2016). The development and validation of instrument for measuring high school students' STEM career motivation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(1), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.1.0075
- Shin, Y., Kwak, Y., Kim, H., Lee, S., Lee, S. H., & Kang, H. (2017). Study on the development of test for indicators of positive experiences about science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(2), 335-346. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.2.0335
- Son, E., Cha, J., & Kim, A. (2007). Test of construct equivalence of personality inventory in low and high socially desirable responding groups. The Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 21(2), 71-87.
- Stöber, J. (2001). The Social Desirability Scale-17 (SDS-17): Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and relationship with age. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 222-232. https://doi.org/10.1027//1015-5759.17.3.222
- Stricker, L. J. (1963). Acquiescence and social desirability response styles: Item characteristics, and conformity. Psychological Reports, 12, 319-341. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1963.12.2.319
- Sweeney, P., & Moreland, R. (1980). Self-schemas and the perseverance of beliefs about the self. Paper presented at the meeting of American Psychological Association, Montreal.
- Vasilopoulos, N., Reilly, R., & Leaman, J. (2000). The influence of job familiarity and impression management on self-report measure scale scores and response latencies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 50-64. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.50
- Yoo, D., Lee, J., & Kim, H. (2012). A study on the comparative analysis of the historical transformation process on employment pattern and characteristics by the period of Korea major enterprise. The Korean Academy of Business History, 27(4), 33-58.
- Zerbe, W. J., & Paulhus, D. L. (1987). Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior: A reconception. Academy of Management Review, 12, 250-264. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1987.4307820
- Zickar, M., & Drasgow, F. (1996). Detecting faking on a personality instrument using appropriateness measurement. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169602000107