Abstract
Measurement limitations have hindered research on learned helplessness (LH) and mastery orientation (MO) in the classroom. We reduced the 24-item Student Behavior Checklist to a 6-item scale and tested the abbreviated measure for evidence of reliability and validity in a sample of 5th and 6th graders (N = 299). We then replicated findings in an independent sample of middle school students (N = 116). Results demonstrated strong support for construct validity of the Student Behavior Checklist-Brief (SBC-B), including a hierarchical two-factor structure indicating the distinctness of LH and MO and an overarching construct, which we refer to as learning approach. Results also demonstrated consistent evidence supporting criterion and convergent/discriminant validity, internal consistency reliability, and temporal stability. The SBC-B offers a psychometrically sound teacher-report measure of LH and MO.
Learned helplessness (LH) and mastery orientation (MO) are related constructs that have been studied for decades in the achievement motivation literature and help explain students’ response to challenging situations (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Fincham et al., 1989; Haimovitz & Dweck, 2017). LH is defined as a passivity in response to failure and is characterized by disengagement in the face of challenging tasks. This passivity is theoretically connected to a loss of motivation to persist in problem-solving behaviors resulting from beliefs in an external locus of control (Fincham et al., 1989; Rotter, 1966). MO is defined as persistence in response to failure and is characterized by continued engagement in challenging tasks. This persistence is theoretically connected to a strong achievement motivation resulting from beliefs in an internal locus of control (Rotter, 1966). Students with MO believe that continued efforts can lead to success, and they utilize more productive learning and study methods, favor challenging tasks, and present with a more positive mindset about learning (Sorrenti et al., 2015; Yates, 2009). Students with LH show greater difficulties completing tasks successfully and higher likelihood of choosing subsequent nonchallenging tasks (Burnette et al., 2013; Yeager & Dweck, 2012), as well as lower academic performance (Hooper & McHugh, 2013; Mega et al., 2014) than mastery-oriented counterparts. Over time, learned helpless individuals develop negative attitudes toward work and display rejection, anxiety, and boredom (Sorrenti et al., 2015).
Related, LH also is an important construct in understanding depression. The reformulated theory of LH (RTLH; Abramson et al., 1978) posits that individuals who demonstrate causal attributions to failure that are internal (e.g., deficient abilities), stable (cause of failure is unlikely to change), and global (cause of failure impacts other areas of their lives) are likely to develop LH and be more prone to depression. Research has demonstrated significant relationships between LH and depression in grade school and middle school students (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 1992; Rueger & Malecki, 2007; Rueger et al., 2010), as well as negative causal attributions (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 1986; Rueger & Malecki, 2007; Rueger et al., 2010).
The Student Behavior Checklist (SBC; Fincham et al., 1989) is one of the only instruments available to assess these important constructs. Utilizing 12 items for each construct, the SBC assesses students’ cognitive, emotional, and/or behavioral features that characterize maladaptive and adaptive approaches to learning. While previous research with the SBC has demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability (α > .90; Fincham et al., 1989; Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 1992; Rueger et al., 2010), its length is undesirable due to time constraints as the measure can be burdensome for teachers to complete (DeVellis, 2011). Hence, it is not surprising that the teacher completion rate of the SBC was less than 50% in one study (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 1986).
Recent studies modified the SBC to a 10-item version focused on math achievement (Yates, 2009) and a 13-item self-report version (Sorrenti et al., 2015). However, some items retained were double-barreled, which is undesirable in test construction (DeVellis, 2011), and both measures resulted in imbalances of LH and MO items. In addition, due to inconsistency in factor analytic support for LH and MO as distinct constructs (Sorrenti et al., 2015; Yates, 2009), clarity about the factor structure is needed. A brief, psychometrically sound measure to assess LH and MO across broader student populations is needed.
Thus, the current study aimed to develop an abbreviated version, the Student Behavior Checklist-Brief (SBC-B), and evaluate the psychometric properties with older children and young adolescents. In Study 1, we reduced the number of items and tested evidence for reliability and validity in a sample of 5th- and 6th-grade students. In Study 2, we reproduced the psychometric evidence and included a test of temporal stability using a sample of 7th- and 8th-grade students. All procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board.
Methods
Study 1: Elementary Schools
Participants were recruited through four public elementary schools in an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse school district in a suburban midwestern town using active consent procedures. The sample consisted of 299 students (53% male) and was 54% white (n = 162), 22% Hispanic (n = 66), 11% biracial (n = 32), 6% Asian American (n = 17), 5% African American (n = 15), and 2% other or unknown (n = 7). There were 107 5th graders and 192 6th graders.
Students with parental permission completed written assent before surveys were administered. Among other measures, students were asked to complete the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition, Child Version (BASC-2; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004). The current investigation utilized the Depression, Anxiety, Attitude to School, and Sensation-Seeking subscales. Teachers completed the SBC (Fincham et al., 1989) for each participating student in their class. Parents’ ratings of academic achievement (0 = well below average to 5 = well above average) were used as an estimate of grade point average (GPA).
Study 2: Middle School
Participants were recruited from a middle school in the same school district using active consent procedures. Written student assent was collected before administering the adolescent version of the BASC-2 (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004). The school assigned students into one of six “teams” of five teachers for the core academic subjects. The five core teachers in each team were asked to complete the SBC (Fincham et al., 1989) for 30 randomly selected students in their team with the option to complete the SBC individually or together as a team. Analyses were conducted on SBC team ratings. The sample for the primary analyses consisted of 116 students (53% male) with 53.5% white (n = 62), 22% Hispanic (n = 26), 10% Asian American (n = 12), 9% biracial (n = 10), 3.5% African American (n = 4), and 2% other or unknown (n = 2). There were 70 seventh graders and 46 eighth graders. The sample to test for temporal stability included 21 students (67% male) who had team ratings taken at a second timepoint 4 months apart.
Results and Discussion
Student Behavior Checklist items were reduced using Study 1 data with corrected item−total correlations in conjunction with a content analysis of items (DeVellis, 2011). Double-barreled items were eliminated, while the top three items with the highest item−total correlation within each subscale were selected for retention (Supplementary Figure shows the SBC-B). All remaining analyses were conducted with Study 1 data and replicated with Study 2 data.
The underlying structure of the SBC-B was examined using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test a two-factor model representing LH and MO, a one-factor model representing one global construct, and a hierarchical model representing a global construct with two underlying factors. CFAs were conducted with R software (R Core Team, 2016) using the lavaan package (Rosseel, 2012). To account for nested data (i.e., students within teams of classrooms), single-level CFAs were fit using robust maximum likelihood and corrected SEs (Dedrick & Greenbaum, 2011). CFA model fit was evaluated using Satorra–Bentler chi-square, the comparative fit index (CFI), and standardized root mean residual (SRMR; Hu & Bentler, 1998). The chi-square test was included as a measure of exact model fit with nonsignificant p-values indicating no significant differences between the models and observed data (Barrett, 2007). CFI values above 0.90 and SRMR values below .10 were criteria for an adequate fit, whereas CFI values above 0.95 and SRMR values below .08 were criteria for an excellent fit (Vandenberg & Lance, 2000). The CFI and SRMR indicated excellent fit for all SBC-B models (Supplementary Table 1). However, the chi-square test was nonsignificant for the hierarchical model in Study 1 and both two-factor models in Study 2, suggesting LH and MO are distinct constructs comprising a global construct.
Cronbach’s alphas of the SBC-B were 0.84/.89 and 0.91/.95 for the LH and MO subscales for elementary/middle school students, respectively, demonstrating “very good” to “excellent” internal consistency reliability (DeVellis, 2011). Criterion-related validity was strong, evidenced by significant correlations between SBC subscales and SBC-B. The 12-item LH scale was significantly positively correlated with the 3-item LH scale (r’s = .95/.95), and the 12-item MO scale was significantly positively correlated with the 3-item MO scale (r’s = .95/.94) in Study 1/Study 2. Additionally, comparison of correlations using Fisher’s r to z transformation found no significant differences in associations between outcome variables and the SBC compared to those with the SBC-B in either study. Finally, bivariate correlations were used to investigate convergent/discriminant validity. In Study 1, both SBC-B subscales were significantly related to Depression, Anxiety, Attitude to School, and GPA, while neither subscales were significantly linked to Sensation-Seeking (Supplementary Table 2). Study 2 had similar results. However, the MO subscale was not related to Anxiety. Finally, Study 2 demonstrated moderate temporal stability across 4 months (r’s = 0.58 and 0.66, for LH and MO, respectively).
Overall, the newly developed 6-item SBC-B demonstrated strong psychometric properties in two independent samples. Specifically, the 3-item subscales demonstrated very strong to excellent internal consistency reliability, moderate temporal stability, and strong criterion-related and convergent–discriminant validity, offering compelling support for its use. Additionally, the CFA of the SBC-B provided statistical evidence of the theory-driven two-factor structure consistent with a SBC self-report version (Sorrenti et al., 2015). Taken together, results of these two studies suggest that the reliability and validity of the SBC-B completed by an aggregate team of teachers familiar with students’ functioning across multiple subjects are comparable to ratings by a single teacher assessing students across multiple subjects. This is important for continuity of assessments as youth transition from individual teachers in grade schools to multiple teachers in middle schools.
Interestingly, the hierarchical factor structure suggests the distinct but related constructs of LH and MO are elements of a global construct, which we refer to as learning approach. We define learning approach as the set of behaviors exhibited in learning situations potentially influenced by the motivation to avoid failure, resulting in LH, or the motivation to learn from failure, resulting in MO. A global learning approach with distinct LH/MO student responses in challenging, failure situations is consistent with implicit theories of intelligence that highlight fixed and growth mindsets as distinct aspects (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Haimovitz & Dweck, 2017). A greater understanding of students’ learning approach using the SBC-B can contribute to growing research on theories of intelligence and growth mindset (Haimovitz & Dweck, 2017). In addition, the wider use of the SBC-B can facilitate research on youth depression, especially as it relates to social-emotional learning (Durlak et al., 2011) and LH as a risk factor for depression (Abramson et al., 1978).
Study strengths include the use of a multi-reporter design, and two independent samples that were ethnically diverse and evenly distributed between boys and girls which supports the generalizability of findings. However, sample size limitations did not allow for comparisons based on race and ethnicity. Additionally, we did not examine subject-specific teacher ratings of LH or MO. Future research could examine whether learning approach for specific subjects might relate differentially to child outcomes. Last, future research should continue to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SBC-B in different samples, specifically by subject, as well as gender and race/ethnicity of the child.
Supplemental Material
sj-pdf-1-jpa-10.1177_07342829211011802 – Supplemental Material for Abbreviated Assessment Tool of Learned Helplessness and Mastery Orientation: The Student Behavior Checklist—Brief
Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-1-jpa-10.1177_07342829211011802 for Abbreviated Assessment Tool of Learned Helplessness and Mastery Orientation: The Student Behavior Checklist—Brief by Sandra Y. Rueger, Alli Cipra, Hyungjoon Choe, Jake C. Steggerda, Andrea E. Kirby and Lauren B. Stone in Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the Wheaton College Senior Scholarship Award, funded by Wheaton College and the Wheaton College Alumni Association, granted to the first author.
Supplemental Material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
