Factor Structure of the Russian Version of the «Metacognitive Awareness Inventory»

IF 0.6 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Kulturno-Istoricheskaya Psikhologiya-Cultural-Historical Psychology Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.17759/chp.2022180213
E. Perikova, V. Byzova
{"title":"Factor Structure of the Russian Version of the «Metacognitive Awareness Inventory»","authors":"E. Perikova, V. Byzova","doi":"10.17759/chp.2022180213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Metacognitive processes are important for the success in the wide range of educational activities of youth and young adults. However, the positive correlations between metacognition and academic achievements are not high enough, and the instruments used in these studies might be the reason. We explored the factor structure of the Russian version of the questionnaire “Metacognitive Awareness Inventory” developed by G. Schraw and R. Dennison and adapted by A.V. Karpov and I.M. Skityaeva into Russian. The participants of our study were 527 residents of St. Petersburg, which were studying at the university at the time. Among them there were 366 students getting their first diploma and 161students getting their second diploma (average age 23.8 ± 8.8). In this article the authors present the results of a confirmatory factor analysis of four models, which are the most frequently used in foreign and Russian literature: unidimensional model; two different two-factor models; eight-factor model. Evaluation of the model fit indices for the four models showed that none of them were a god fit. We reduced the number of items of the questionnaire and re-implemented the factor analysis of these four models. The values of indicators of a good model fit improved. In the short version of the questionnaire “Metacognitive Awareness Inventory” the authors discovered two scales – knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition, which included 8 subscales: declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, conditional knowledge, planning, information management strategies, comprehension monitoring, debugging strategies, evaluation.","PeriodicalId":44568,"journal":{"name":"Kulturno-Istoricheskaya Psikhologiya-Cultural-Historical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kulturno-Istoricheskaya Psikhologiya-Cultural-Historical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2022180213","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Metacognitive processes are important for the success in the wide range of educational activities of youth and young adults. However, the positive correlations between metacognition and academic achievements are not high enough, and the instruments used in these studies might be the reason. We explored the factor structure of the Russian version of the questionnaire “Metacognitive Awareness Inventory” developed by G. Schraw and R. Dennison and adapted by A.V. Karpov and I.M. Skityaeva into Russian. The participants of our study were 527 residents of St. Petersburg, which were studying at the university at the time. Among them there were 366 students getting their first diploma and 161students getting their second diploma (average age 23.8 ± 8.8). In this article the authors present the results of a confirmatory factor analysis of four models, which are the most frequently used in foreign and Russian literature: unidimensional model; two different two-factor models; eight-factor model. Evaluation of the model fit indices for the four models showed that none of them were a god fit. We reduced the number of items of the questionnaire and re-implemented the factor analysis of these four models. The values of indicators of a good model fit improved. In the short version of the questionnaire “Metacognitive Awareness Inventory” the authors discovered two scales – knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition, which included 8 subscales: declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, conditional knowledge, planning, information management strategies, comprehension monitoring, debugging strategies, evaluation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
俄语版“元认知意识量表”的因素结构
元认知过程对于青少年和青年成人广泛的教育活动的成功是重要的。然而,元认知与学业成绩之间的正相关性还不够高,这可能是这些研究中使用的工具的原因。我们研究了由G. Schraw和R. Dennison开发并由A.V. Karpov和I.M. Skityaeva改编成俄文的“元认知意识量表”的俄文版问卷的因素结构。我们研究的参与者是527名圣彼得堡的居民,他们当时正在这所大学学习。其中获得第一学位的366人,获得第二学位的161人(平均年龄23.8±8.8岁)。本文对国外和俄罗斯文献中最常用的四个模型进行了验证性因子分析:单维模型;两种不同的双因素模型;eight-factor模型。对4个模型的模型拟合指标进行了评价,结果表明,4个模型都不是很好的拟合。我们减少了问卷的项目数,并重新对这四个模型进行了因子分析。良好模型的各项指标的拟合值有所提高。在“元认知意识量表”的简易版中,作者发现了认知知识和认知调节两个量表,包括陈述性知识、程序性知识、条件性知识、计划、信息管理策略、理解监控、调试策略、评价等8个子量表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
13
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Actor Training: Competencies or Aptitude Russian Version of the Sources of Spirituality Scale On the Problem of the Semantic Structure of Consciousness Development of Social and Psychological Readiness for Professional and Working Life in Students with Intellectual Disabilities Development of Formal-logical and Dialectical Thinking in Children of 5-8 Years Old
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1