Validitas Struktur Internal Self-Determination Scale versi Indonesia: Pengujian Struktur Faktor, Reliabilitas, dan Invariansi Pengukuran

Darmawan Muttaqin

doi:10.22146/gamajop.73511

Validitas Struktur Internal Self-Determination Scale versi Indonesia: Pengujian Struktur Faktor, Reliabilitas, dan Invariansi Pengukuran

Darmawan Muttaqin

(Submitted 11 March 2022)

(Published 17 May 2023)

Abstract

Self-Determination Scale (SDS) telah digunakan untuk mengukur determinasi diri, kesadaran terhadap diri sendiri, dan kesempatan untuk menentukan pilihan tetapi belum terdapat penelitian yang menguji properti psikometri dari SDS. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi validitas struktur internal dari SDS versi Indonesia. Penelitian ini melibatkan 703 remaja yang berusia 12-21 tahun yang sedang menempuh pendidikan di Kota Surabaya. Partisipan direkrut dengan teknik convenience sampling dengan cara menghubungi secara langsung dan melalui media sosial. Evaluasi validitas struktur internal dari SDS versi Indonesia meliputi struktur faktor, reliabilitas, dan invariansi pengukuran antar gender dan kelompok usia yang diuji dengan analisis konfirmatori faktor, reliabilitas komposit, dan analisis multi-kelompok. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa model bifaktor dari SDS versi Indonesia memiliki ketepatan model dan reliabilitas yang memuaskan. Namun, SDS versi Indonesia tidak memiliki invariansi pengukuran antar gender dan kelompok usia. Temuan ini mengindikasikan bahwa SDS versi Indonesia dapat digunakan untuk mengukur determinasi diri, kesadaran terhadap diri sendiri, dan kesempatan untuk menentukan pilihan tetapi tidak dapat digunakan untuk membandingkan skor antar gender dan kelompok usia

Keywords

determinasi diri; invariansi pengukuran; model bifaktor; reliabilitas; SDS

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.22146/gamajop.73511

References

AERA, APA, & NCME. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association. https://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/standards

Araten-Bergman, T. (2015). The subjective well-being of individuals diagnosed with comorbid intellectual disability and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders. Quality of Life Research, 24(8), 1875–1886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0936-4

Arezah, E., & Haryanta, H. (2022). Determinasi diri sebagai prediktor ketangguhan mental pada atlet mahasiswa. Sang Pencerah, 8(2), 487–494. https://doi.org/10.35326/pencerah.v8i2.2075

Bandalos, D. L. (2018). Measurement theory and applications for the social sciences. The Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-56623-000

Blankson, A. N., & McArdle, J. J. (2015). Measurement invariance of cognitive abilities across ethnicity, gender, and time among older Americans. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 70(3), 386–397. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbt106

Brown, T. A. (2015). Conﬁrmatory factor analysis for applied research. The Guildford Press.

Bülbül, A. E., & Arslan, C. (2017). Investigation of patience tendency levels in terms of self-determination, self-compassion and personality features. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 1632–1645. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050921

Byrne, B. M., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2010). Testing for measurement and structural equivalence in large-scale cross-cultural studies: Addressing the issue of nonequivalence. International Journal of Testing, 10(2), 107–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305051003637306

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834

Chen, F. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1005–1018. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013193

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. Plenum. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7

Diotaiuti, P., Falese, L., Mancone, S., & Purromuto, F. (2017). A structural model of self-efficacy in handball referees. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00811

Eichengreen, A., Hoofien, D., & Bachar, E. (2016). Empirically based suggested insights into the concept of false-self defense: Contributions from a study on normalization of children with disabilities. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 64(1), 107–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003065115616843

Fasczewski, K. S., & Gill, D. L. (2019). A model of motivation for physical activity in individuals diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Disability and Rehabilitation, 41(18), 2143–2150. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1459883

Finch, H. W., Immekus, J. C., & French, B. F. (2016). Applied psychometrics using SPSS and AMOS. Information Age Publishing Inc. DOI:10.4236/psych.2018.911144

Goldbeck, F., Hautzinger, M., & Wolkenstein, L. (2019). Validation of the German version of the Subjective Vitality Scale - A cross-sectional study and a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Well-Being Assessment, 3(1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41543-019-00019-8

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications, Inc. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236032728_A_Primer_on_Partial_Least_Squares_Structural_Equation_Modeling

Kline, R. B. (2014). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). American Psychological Association. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cahyono-St/publication/361910413_Principles_and_Practice_of_Structural_Equation_Modeling/links/62cc4f0ed7bd92231faa4db1/Principles-and-Practice-of-Structural-Equation-Modeling.pdf

Kocayörük, E., Altıntas, E., & İçbay, M. A. (2015). The perceived parental support, autonomous-self and well-being of adolescents: A cluster-analysis approach. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(6), 1819–1828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-9985-5

Lane, S. (2014). Validity evidence based on testing consequences. Psicothema, 26(1), 127–135. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.258

Lynch, M. F. (2013). Attachment, autonomy, and emotional reliance: A multilevel model. Journal of Counseling & Development, 91(3), 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2013.00098.x

Mao, X., Zhang, J., & Xin, T. (2019). Application of dimension reduction to CAT item selection under the bifactor model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43(6), 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621618813086

Millsap, R. E., & Olivera-Aguilar, M. (2012). Investigating measurement invariance using confirmatory factor analysis. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 380–392). The Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-16551-023

Mouratidis, A., & Lens, W. (2015). Adolescents’ psychological functioning at school and in sports: The role of future time perspective and domain-specific and situation-specific self-determined motivation. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 34(8), 643–673. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2015.34.8.643

Mouratidis, A., & Michou, A. (2011). Perfectionism, self-determined motivation, and coping among adolescent athletes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(4), 355–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.03.006

Mouratidis, A., Michou, A., & Vassiou, A. (2017). Adolescents’ autonomous functioning and implicit theories of ability as predictors of their school achievement and week-to-week study regulation and well-being. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 48, 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.09.001

Nilamsari, G. A., Sugara, G. S., & Sulistiana, D. (2020). Analisis determinasi diri remaja. Journal of Innovative Counseling, 4(01), 20–33. https://journal.umtas.ac.id/index.php/innovative_counseling/article/view/873

Padilla, J. L., & Benítez, I. (2014). Validity evidence based on response processes. Psicothema, 26(1), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.259

Passmore, H. A., Howell, A. J., & Holder, M. D. (2018). Positioning implicit theories of well-being within a positivity framework. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19(8), 2445–2463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9934-2

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.