Plucker, Taylor, Callahan, and Tomchin concluded that confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) of responses to the Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ) II provided only limited support for construct validity with gifted students because of the modest fit of their CFA models. They acknowledged, however, that potential complications (e.g., their CFA models, treatment of missing data, and highly nonnormal data) meant that their conclusions may be premature. Here, the authors analyzed data from their original study (N = 376) and new data from another gifted-student program (N = 837), exploring alternative approaches to missing data and data normalization. The a priori model based on the design of the SDQII resulted in a good fit to the data for the total group, and the factor solution was invariant across the two samples of gifted students. The results strongly support the construct validity of responses to the SDQII by gifted adolescents.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
2.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
3.
Boyle, G. J. (1994). Self-Description Questionnaire II: A review. Test Critiques, 10, 632-643.
4.
Brown, R. L. (1994). Efficiency of the indirect approach for estimating structural equation model with missing data: A comparison of five methods. Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 287-316.
5.
Browne, M. W. , & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. Bollen & R. Stine (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
Byrne, B. (1996). Measuring self-concept across the life span: Issues and instrumentation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Cornell, D. G. (1994). Barriers to research in gifted education. In N. Colangelo, S. G. Assouline, & D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development (Vol. 2, pp. 173-193). Dayton: Ohio Psychology.
9.
Craven, R. G. , Marsh, H. W., & Print, M. (2000). Selective, streamed and mixed-ability programs for gifted students: Impact on self-concept, motivation, and achievement. Australian Journal of Education, 44, 51-75.
10.
Graham, J. W. , & Hoffer, S. M. (2000). Multiple imputation in multivariate research. In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnable, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multilevel data: Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples (pp. 201-218). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
Hattie, J. (1992). Self-concept. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
Hoge, R. D. , & Renzulli, J. S. (1993). Exploring the link between giftedness and self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 63, 449-465.
13.
Janos, P. M. , & Robinson, N. M. (1985). The performance of students in a program of radical acceleration at the university level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 175-179.
14.
Jöreskog, K. G. , & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
15.
Little, R.J.A. , & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: John Wiley.
16.
Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. , & Swiatek, M. A. (1999). Elementary student talent searches: Establishing appropriate guidelines for qualifying test scores. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 265-272.
17.
Marsh, H. W. (1988). Self Description Questionnaire: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self-concept: A test manual and a research monograph. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
18.
Marsh, H. W. (1990a). A multidimensional, hierarchical self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 77-172.
19.
Marsh, H. W. (1990b). Self Description Questionnaire (SDQ) II: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of adolescent self-concept. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation. (Republished in 1992, Publication Unit, Faculty of Education, University of Western Sydney, Macarthur.)
20.
Marsh, H. W. (1993). Academic self-concept: Theory measurement and research. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 4, pp. 59-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
Marsh, H. W. (1994a). Confirmatory factor analysis models of factorial invariance: A multifaceted approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 5-34.
22.
Marsh, H. W. (1994b). Using the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 to evaluate theoretical models of self-concept: The Self-Description Questionnaire. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 439-456.
23.
Marsh, H. W. , Balla, J. R., & Hau, K. T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling techniques (pp. 315-353). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
Marsh, H. W. , Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness of fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410.
25.
Marsh, H. W. , Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. (1988). A multifaceted academic self-concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 366-380.
26.
Marsh, H. W. , Chessor, D., Craven, R. G., & Roche, L. (1995). The effects of gifted and talented programs on academic self-concept: The big fish strikes again. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 285-319.
27.
Marsh, H. W. , & Craven, R. (1997). Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement, and adjustment (pp. 131-198). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
28.
Marsh, H. W. , & Hocevar, D. (1985). The application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First and higher order factor structures and their invariance across age groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 562-582.
29.
Marsh, H. W. , & O’Niell, R. (1984). Self Description Questionnaire III (SDQ III): The construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late-adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 153-174.
30.
Marsh, H. W. , Parker, J., & Barnes, J (1985). Multidimensional adolescent self-concepts: Their relationship to age, sex and academic measures. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 422-444.
31.
Maruyama, G. M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (1998). Research evidence regarding the validity and effects of talent search educational programs. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 9,134-138.
33.
Plucker, J. A. , Taylor, J. W., Callahan, C. M., & Tomchin, E. M. (1997). Mirror, mirror, on the wall: Reliability and validity evidence for the Self Description Questionnaire-II with gifted students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 704-713.
34.
Pyryt, M. C. , & Mendaglio, S. (1994). The multidimensional self-concept: A comparison of gifted and average-ability adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, 299-305.
35.
Ross, A. , & Parker, M. (1980). Academic and social self concepts of the academically gifted. Exceptional Children, 47, 6-11.
36.
Schumacker, R. E. , & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37.
Shavelson, R. J. , Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.
38.
SPSS . (1999). SPSS for Windows (Release 10.0.5). Chicago: Author.
39.
Wothke, W. (2000). Longitudinal and multigroup modeling with missing data. In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnable, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multilevel data: Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples (pp. 201-218). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
40.
Wylie, R. C. (1989). Measures of self-concept. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
