The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) is a measure of university students’ approach to learning. Original evaluation of the scale’s psychometric properties was based on a sample of Hong Kong university students’ scores. The purpose of this study was to test and cross-validate the R-SPQ-2F factor structure, based on separate cohort data (Cohort 1: n = 1,490; Cohort 2: n = 1,533), among students attending a university in the United States. Factor analytic results did not support the scale’s original factor structure, instead suggesting an alternative four-factor model of the scale data. In the cross-validation study, multisample confirmatory factor analysis results indicated that the scale’s measurement model parameters (e.g., factor loadings) were invariant across independent samples. Despite support for the scale’s respecified factor structure for Western university students, continued research is recommended to improve the scale’s psychometric properties. Implications for test score use and interpretation are discussed.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. ( 1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
Benson, J., & Bandalos, D.L. (1992). Second-order confirmatory factor analysis of the reactions to tests with cross-validation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 459-487.
3.
Biggs, J. ( 1978). Individual and group differences in study processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 48, 266-279.
4.
Biggs, J. ( 1987). The Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ): Manual. Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.
5.
Biggs, J. ( 1993). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 3-19.
6.
Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, Y.P. ( 2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F . British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149.
7.
Bollen, K.A. ( 1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
8.
Boyle, E.A., Duffy, T., & Dunleavy, K. ( 2003). Learning styles and academic outcomes: The validity and utility of Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles in a British higher education setting. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 73, 267-290.
9.
Byrne, B. ( 1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic applications and programs. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Chen, F., Bollen, K., Paxton, P., Curran, P.J., & Kirby, J. ( 2001). Improper solutions in structural equation models: Causes, consequences, and strategies. Sociological Methods and Research , 29, 468-508.
Cliff, N. ( 1983). Some cautions concerning the application of causal modeling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18, 115-126.
13.
Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. ( 1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18, 147-167.
14.
Duff, A. ( 2002). Approaches to learning: Factor invariance across gender . Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 997-1010.
15.
Duhachek, A., & Iacobucci, D. ( 2004). Alpha’s standard error (ASE): An accurate and precise confidence interval estimate. Journal of Applied Psychology , 89, 792-808.
16.
Entwistle, N.J., & Tait, H. ( 1995). The revised approaches to studying inventory. Edinburgh, Scotland: Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction.
17.
Entwistle, N., & Waterston, S. ( 1988). Approaches to studying and levels of processing in university students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 258-265.
18.
Fan, X., & Thompson, B. ( 2001). Confidence intervals about score reliability coefficients, please: An EPM guidelines editorial. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 517-531.
19.
Flora, D.B., & Curran, P.J. ( 2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491.
20.
Fox, R.A., McManus, I.C., & Winder, B.C. ( 2001). The shortened Study Process Questionnaire: An investigation of its structure and longitudinal stability using confirmatory factor analysis . British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 511-530.
21.
Gordon, C., & Debus, R. ( 2002). Developing deep learning approaches and personal teaching efficacy within a preservice teacher education context. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 483-511.
22.
Gow, L., & Kember, D. ( 1990). Does higher education promote independent learning? Higher Education, 19, 307-322.
23.
Graham, J.M., Guthrie, A.C., & Thompson, B. ( 2003). Consequences of not interpreting structure coefficients in published CFA research: A reminder. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 10, 142-153.
24.
Hall, C.W. ( 1992). Test review of the Study Process Questionnaire. In J. J. Kramer & J. C. Conoley (Eds.), The eleventh mental measurements yearbook [Electronic version]. Retrieved March 25, 2005, from http://www.unl.edu/buros
25.
Hall, C.W., Bolen, L.M., & Gupton, Jr., R.H. (1995). Predictive validity of the Study Process Questionnaire for undergraduate students. College Student Journal, 29, 234-239.
26.
Henson, R.K. ( 2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177-189.
27.
Henson, R.K., & Roberts, J.K. ( 2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 393-416.
28.
Hinkin, T.R. ( 1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods , 1, 104-121.
29.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. ( 1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
30.
Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
31.
Keith, T.Z. ( 1997). Using confirmatory factor analysis to aid in understanding the constructs measured by intelligence tests. In D. P. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft, & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 373-403). New York: Guilford.
32.
Kember, D., & Gow, L. ( 1990). Cultural specificity of approaches to study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 356-363.
33.
Kember, D., & Leung, D.Y.P. ( 1998). The dimensionality of approaches to learning: An investigation with confirmatory factor analysis of the structure of the SPQ and LPQ. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 323-343.
34.
Kember, D., Wong, A., & Leung, Y.P. ( 1999). Reconsidering the dimensions of approaches to learning . British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 323-343.
35.
Kline, R. ( 2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guildford.
36.
Little, T.D. ( 1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53-72.
37.
Marsh, H.W. ( 1987). The hierarchical structure of self-concept and the application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 17-39.
38.
MacCallum, R.C., Roznowski, M., & Necowitz, L.B. (1992). Model modification in covariance structure analysis: The problem of capitalization on chance. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 490-504.
39.
Meyer, J.H.F., Dunne, T.T., & Richardson, J.T.E. (1994). A gender comparison of contextualised study behavior in higher education. Higher Education, 27, 469-485.
40.
Michael, W.B., Michael, J.J., & Zimmerman, W.S. (1985). Study Attitudes and Methods Survey (SAMS). San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
41.
Miller, C.D., Finley, J., & McKinley, D.L. (1990). Learning approaches and motives: Male and female differences and implications for learning assistance programs. Journal of College Student Development, 31, 147-154.
42.
Millsap, R.E., & Yun-Tein, J. ( 2004). Assessing factorial invariance in ordered-categorical measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 479-515.
43.
Muthén, B., du Toit, S.H.C., & Spisic, D. ( 1997). Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equation in latent variable modeling with categorical and continuous outcomes. Unpublished manuscript.
44.
Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (1998-2006). MPLUS user’s guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles : Muthén & Muthén.
45.
Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
46.
O’Connor, B.P. ( 2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396-402.
47.
Richardson, J.T. ( 1994). Cultural specificity of approaches to studying in higher education. Higher Education, 27, 449-468.
48.
Rindskopf, D., & Rose, T. ( 1988). Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 51-67.
49.
Schmeck, R.R., & Geisler-Bernstein, E. (1992). Inventory of Learning Processes-Revised. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University.
50.
Schmeck, R.R., Ribich, F., & Ramanaiah, N. ( 1977). Development of a self-report inventory for assessing individual differences in learning processes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 413-431.
51.
Speth, C., & Brown, R. ( 1988). Study approaches, processes, and strategies: Are three perspectives better than one?British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 247-257.
52.
Thompson, B., & Daniel, L.G. ( 1996). Factor analytic evidence for the construct validity of scores: A historical overview and some guidelines. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 197-208.
53.
Thurston, L.L. ( 1947). Multiple factor analysis. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
54.
Vandenberg, R.J., & Lance, C.E. ( 2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-70.
55.
Vermunt, J.D. ( 1994). Inventory of Learning Styles in Higher Education: Scoring key. Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University, Department of Educational Psychology.
56.
Vermunt, J.D. ( 1998). The regulation of constructive learning processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 149-171.
57.
Weinstein, C.E. ( 1987). Learning and Study Strategies Inventory. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.
58.
Wilson, K.L., Smart, R.M., & Watson, R.J. ( 1996). Gender differences in approaches to learning in first year psychology students. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 66, 59-71.
59.
Zeegers, P. ( 2001). Approaches to learning in science: A longitudinal study . British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 115-132.
60.
Zwick, W.R., & Velicer, W.F. ( 1986). Factors influencing five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432-442.
