مقیاس دوبُعدی توانایی‌های شناختی اجتماعی- غیراجتماعی: بازطراحی و مدل‌سازی براساس نظریه سؤال- پاسخ چندبُعدی، معادلات ساختاری و داده‌های شبیه‌سازی‌شده

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران.

2 استاد روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران.

3 دانشیار روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران.

چکیده

هدف از پژوهش حاضر، بررسی ساختار توانایی‌های شناختی دانش‌آموزان براساس پرسشنامه توانایی‌های شناختی نجاتی (1392) و ارائه مدلی برای ساختار آن بود. مطالعه حاضر به لحاظ روش، یک پژوهش توصیفی- تحلیلی و از نوع مدل‌سازی رابطه بین سؤال­ها و پاسخ­ها بود. حجم نمونه مشتمل بر 1105 دانش‌آموز (527 دختر و 578 پسر) پایه نهم تحصیلی شهر اهواز بود که به روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی طبقه‌ای نسبتی انتخاب شده بودند. تحلیل داده‌ها با استفاده از نظریه سؤال- پاسخ چندبُعدی (MIRT)، مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری (SEM) و داده‌های شبیه‌سازی شده (SD) انجام گرفت. نتایج تحلیل بُعدیت اکتشافی نشان داد ساختار اولیه پرسشنامه توانایی‌های شناختی (CAQ) برای دانش‌آموزان تأیید نمی­شود. پرسشنامه باز طراحی‌شده شامل 21 سؤال به‌عنوان مقیاس دوبُعدی توانایی‌های شناختی اجتماعی- غیراجتماعی نام‌گذاری شد و روایی و پایایی ابعاد و عامل‌های به‌دست آمده از آن تأیید شد. مقیاس جدید نشان داد، گرچه ساختار توانایی‌های شناختی سلسله‌مراتبی می‌باشد، اما این ساختار تک‌بُعدی نیست و حداقل شامل دوبُعد شناخت غیراجتماعی و شناخت اجتماعی می‌باشد. برخلاف نتایج پژوهش‌های پیشین، این یافته‌ها نشان داد نظریه هوش عمومی یا عامل g اسپیرمن، قادر به بازنمایی صحیح ساختار توانایی‌های شناحتی نیست و لازم است شناخت اجتماعی نیز، به‌عنوان بُعدی از توانایی‌های شناختی لحاظ شود. همچنین، نتایج این پژوهش یافته‌های برخی پژوهش‌ها مبنی بر این‌که شناخت غیراجتماعی و شناخت اجتماعی دوبُعد متفاوت توانایی‌های شناختی را تشکیل می­دهند، تأیید کرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Two-Dimensional Scale of Social-Nonsocial Cognitive Abilities: Redesigning and Modeling Based on Multidimensional Item Response Theory, Structural Equations and Simulated Data

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohsen Yazdanfar 1
  • Manijeh Shehni Yailagh 2
  • Ali Reza Haji Yakhchali 3
  • Sirous Alipour Birigani 3
1 Ph.D student in Educational Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.
2 Professor in Educational Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz,, Ahvaz, Iran.
3 Associate Professor in Educational Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The aim of this study was to investigate the structure of cognitive abilities of students based on the Nejati Cognitive Ability Questionnaire (2013) and offer a model for its structure. The sample size consisted of 1105 students (527 girls, 578 boys) of the 9th grade of Ahwaz, selected by proportional stratified random sampling method. Data analysis was performed using multidimensional item response theory (MIRT), structural equation modeling and simulated data. The results of exploratory dimensionality analysis showed that the initial structure of the cognitive ability questionnaire for students was not confirmed. The redesigned 21-item questionnaire was named as the two-dimensional scale of social-nonsocial cognitive abilities and the validity and reliability of the dimensions and the obtained factors were confirmed. The new scale showed that although the structure of cognitive abilities is hierarchical, it is not a unidimensional structure and contains at least two dimensions of non-social cognition and social cognition. Also, our findings showed that Spearman's theory of general intelligence or factor g cannot accurately represent the structure of cognitive abilities and social cognition needs to be considered as a dimension of cognitive abilities. Furthermore, our results also support the findings of some studies that non-social cognition and social cognition constitute two different dimensions of cognitive abilities.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Two-dimensional scale of cognitive abilities
  • social-nonsocial cognition
  • multidimensional item response theory
  • simulated data
نجاتی، و. (1392). پرسشنامه توانایی­های شناختی: طراحی و بررسی خصوصیات روان­سنجی. فصلنامه تازه­های علوم شناختی. 15(2)، 19-11

 

Baars, B. J., & Gage, N. M. (2013). Fundamentals of cognitive neuroscience: A beginner's guide. Boston: Academic Press.

Balkemore, S. J., & Mills, K. L. (2014). Is adolescence a sensitive period for sociocultural processing? Annual Review of Psychology. 65(1), 187-207.

Blanchin, M., Hardouin, J. B., Guillemin, F., Falissard, B., & Se´bille, V. (2013). Power and sample size determination for the group comparison of patient-reported outcomes with rasch family models. PLoS One. 8(2), 1-13.

Bulut, O., & Sunbul. O. (2017). Monte carlo simulation studies in item response theory with the R programming language. Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology. 8(3), 266-287.

Busemeyer, J. R., & Diederich, A. (2010). Cognitive modeling. SAGE Publication, Inc.

Cai, L., Du Toit, S. H. C., & Thissen, D. (2011). IRTPRO: User guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

Chen, W. H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indices for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 22(3), 265-289.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th Ed.). New York: Edwards Brothers, Inc.

Dey, S., Newell, B. R., & Michelle, L. M. (2018). The relative effects of abstract versus concrete thinking on decision-making in depression. Behavior Research and Therapy. 110(1), 11-21.

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.

Eysenck, M. W. & Keane, M. T. (2010). Cognitive psychology: A student’s handbook (6th Ed.) USA and Canada: Psychology Press.

Frajo-Apor, B., Pardeller, S., Kemmler, G., Welte, A. S., & Hofer, A. (2016). Emotional intelligence deficits in schizophrenia: The impact of nonsocial cognition. Schizophrenia Research. 172(3), 131-136.

Gaemmerer, J. M., Maddocks, D. L. S., Keith, T. S., & Reynolds, M. R. (2018). Effects of cognitive abilities on child and youth academic achievement: Evidence from the WISC-V and WIAT-III. Intelligence. 68(1), 6-20.

Gibbons, R. D., & Cai, L. (2018). Dimensionality analysis. In W. J. Van der Linden (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory models (Vol.3), Applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Gillespie, D. F., & Mileti, D. S. (1981). Heterogeneous samples in organizational research. Sociological Methods & Research. 9(3), 375-388.

Ikebuchi, E. (2007). Social skills and social and nonsocial cognitive functioning in schizophrenia. Journal of Mental Health, 16(5), 581-594.

Ismatullina, V., & Voronin, I. (2017). Individual differences in the relationship between temperament and planning ability in adolescents. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 237(1), 1455-61.

Jenkins, A. C., & Mitchell, J. P. (2011). How has cognitive neuroscience contributed to social psychological theory? In A. Todorov, S. Fiske & D. Prentice. (Eds.), Social Neuroscience. Oxford University Press, Inc.

Jiang, S., Wang, C., & Weiss, D. (2016). The sample size requirements for estimation of item parameters in the multidimensional graded response model. Frontiers in Psychology.7(1), 1-10.

Lin, P. Z., Bai, H. Y., Suna, J. W., Guo, W., & Zhanga, H. H. (2017). Association between child maltreatment and prospective and retrospective memory in adolescents: The mediatory effect of neuroticism. Child Abuse & Neglect. 65(1), 58-67.

Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2006). Limited information goodness-of-fit testing in multidimensional contingency tables. Psychometrika. 71(4), 713-732.

Morasch, K. C., & Bell, M. A. (2011). The role of iInhibitory control in behavioral and physiological expressions of toddler executive function. Experimental Child Psychology. 108(1), 593-606.

Moskowitz, G. B. (2013). Social cognition: Understanding self and others. New York: Guilford Press.

Muraki, E., & Carlson, J. E. (1995). Full-information factor analysis for polytomous item responses. Applied Psychological Measurement. 19(1), 73-90.

Oconnell, M. (2018). The power of cognitive ability in explaining educational test performance, relative to other ostensible contenders. Intelligence. 66(1), 122-127.

Osburn, H. K., & Mumford, M. D. (2006). Creativity and planning: Training interventions to develop creative problem-solving skills. Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 173-190.

Parola, A., Berardinelli. L, & Bosco, F.M. (2018). Cognitive abilities and theory of mind in explaining communicative-pragmatic disorders in patients with schizophrenia. Psychiatry Research. 260(1), 144-151.

Phillipson, S., & Phillipson, S. N. (2011). Children’s cognitive ability and their academic achievement: The mediation effects of parental expectations. Asia Pacific Education Review. 13(3), 495-508.

Pino Escobar, G., Kalashnikova, M., & Escudero, P. (2018). Vocabulary matters! The relationship between verbal fluency and measures of inhibitory control in monolingual and bilingual children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 170(1), 177-189.

Reckase, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. New York, NY: Springer.

Strenze, T. (2007). Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A metaanalytic review of longitudinal research. Intelligence. 35(1), 401-426.

Svetina, D., & Levy, R. (2016). Dimensionality in compensatory MIRT when complex structure exists: Evaluation of DETECT and NOHARM. Journal of Experimental Education. 84(2), 398-420.

Vaskinn, A., Andersson, V., Østefjells, T., Andreassen, O. E., & Sundet, K. (2018). Emotion perception, nonsocial cognition and symptoms as predictors of theory of mind in schizophrenia. Comprehensive Psychiatry. 85(1), 1-7.

Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Patel, S., & Patel, D. (2004). A layered reference model of the brain (LRMB). IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 36(2), 124-133.

Wei Ko, L., Komarov. O., Hairston, W. D., Ping Jung, T., & Teng Lin, C. (2017). Sustained attention in real classroom settings: An EEG study. Frontiers in Human. Neuroscience. 11(1), 1-10.

Woodcock, W. R., Maricle, D. E., Miller, D. C., & McGill, R. J. (2018). Functional Cattell-Horn-Carroll nomenclature for practical applications. In D. P. Flanagan & E. M., McDonough (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment theories, tests, and issues (4th Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

Zhang, J. (2013). A procedure for dimensionality analyses of response data from various test designs. Psychometrika. 78(1), 37-58.