0000 - atu.ac.ir · à z¼ ¾Ëy ʼ¸ ½y Áy{d»|y ¶v» Ê { Äf ʳ{y¿zy ¹z¿ ¹z¿¦Ë{...
TRANSCRIPT
-
4 89
))
www.srlst.com ((
- 3777/11/3 17/3/1389
)( .
-
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11
-
.
. .
. .
.
. 1 . : )
( . ) ( . 2 . : ) 200 ( ) 6 (. 3 .
) ( . 4 . :
. : ) . .( ) .( :.
-
. : ). .( . . :) (.
. : ). .( » « ) .( . :
. . : ). .(» «
) .( . : .
- : ). .(» « . .
5 . 3 word . 6 . .
1. )3 ( 2.
1 . . 2 . » « . 3 . .
-
) (................................................................................................................1
) ............................................................................................................................(27
) (........................................................................................................55
) ...........(...................................................................................73
) ....(......................................................................................89
) ..................................(.......................................................111
) ( - STAXI-2
) .(....................................................................................................127
-
1
2
:4/3/89 :22/8/90
. 276 )137 139 (
. 108
. .
)96/0=.( 63
.
) ( . t
1- ) ( 2-
-
2 4 89
Z T
.
NEO-PI-R . .
: .
.
.
. . . 1 2
3 ) 1979 1383.(
.
) 1908 1386 .(
1. neurotic 2. brain damaged 3. verbal skills
-
3
» «
.
) (
. ...
.
. )
1386( .
.
. :
) 1982 1375.(
.
-
4 4 89
)2002 1381.(
. –
- .
) 1360.(
.
) 1385 .(
) 1350.(
... . .
-
5
1-
2-
.
1- 2-
3-
4-
.
1-
2-
-
6 4 89
3-
4- ) (
5- 6-
7- NEO-PI-R
.
: 1- 2-
.
. :
1- 2- 1 .
1. Validity
-
7
3- 1 .
1388-1387 .
.
.
.
.
. )1956 ( 200 )1973 (
100 200 ) ( 300 500 1000 ) 1385.(
240 300 276 .
1. Reliability
-
8 4 89
)240 ( )60
( S ) ( . .
) (
. 5 30 . 240
. N ) ( E) ( O ) (
) ( C) ( . A ,C
. 17 .
) ( 0 1 2 3 4 . 48
8 ) 1380.(
NEO-PI-R S 56/0 – 81/0
. 31
-
9
3 66/0 92/0 )93/0 87/0
86/0 ( N EO ) 1983 1380.(
)502 (
) 1385(.
60 NEO-FFI .
5 . 5 12 0 1 2 3 4
. ) 1385.(
. T .
) 1386.(
NEO-FFI T
56 45 55 44
-
10 4 89
NEO-FFI NEO-FFI
. TABLSA1 92/0
90/0 91/0 77/0 87/0 N EO A C . 92/0 90/0 95/0 85/0 89/0
. )1385 ( NE O A C 57/0 47/0 47/0
46/0 52/0 . 74/0 63/0 50/0 54/0 60/0 ) 1386.(
5
) 1385.( ) (
.
) 1986 1382 .( .
.
1. The Augmented Baltimore longitudinal study of Aginy
-
11
.
. .
) 1354 1386 .(
) 1386 .( )1974 ( .
) 1385.(
: :
:
- :
1- . 2- . 3- .
-
12 4 89
- :
4- . 5- . 6- .
- :
7- . 8- . 9- . 10- . 11- .
- :
12- .
13- . 14- .
: .
.
-
13
. 219 . 219 50
9423/0 = . :
3/0 108
.
8
0 7 . .
.
300
.
.
-
14 4 89
.
276 Spss
11/5 .
50 42 )56(
.
343 .
5 .
219 . 219 50
. . )
=9423/0( .
-
15
3/0
108 )276 ( .
. 219
)300 ( . 24 276 .
139 )4/50 ( 137 )6/49 ( 69 )25 ( 14 )1/5 (
22 )8 ( 7 )5/2 ( 28 )1/10 ( 104 )7/37 ( 32
)6/11 ( . 9/22 79/3 44 18 .
. :
-
16 4 89
–
.
1. -
276 98/0 28/0
– K-S )01/0 ( . 99 %
.
4/0 69 9613/0 .
.
-
17
2. KMO
KMO 915/0
867/16151
4560 )p( 0001/0
(KMO)1 915/0
2
.
.
. 17
17 20/66 . .
1. kaiser-Meyer-Olkin 2. Bartlett test of sphericity
-
18 4 89
Scree Plot
Component Number
696561575349454137332925211713951
Eig
enva
lue
30
20
10
0
. )
1386 .( 5 5 35/43 5 17
)20/66 ( . 3/0 5
.
) 11989 1384.(
1. Ferguson & Takane
-
19
63
9591/0 .
.
.
.
50
42 56 .
3. T
T )p (
F 251/0 61/0 16/4 82 001/0
t
99
-
20 4 89
.
4. t
T )p ( F
79/0 37/0 351/0 274 72/0
t 05/0 .
5. t
T )p (
F
18/0 66/0 218/0
274 82/0
44/0 50/0 47/0 274 63/0 8/8 03/0 05/2 91/259 04/0
26/0 60/0 45/0 274 64/0 23/0 63/0 34/0 274 73/0
-
21
.
Z T.
.
.
.
.
-
22 4 89
9.
53/0- 001/0
40/0- 001/0
39/0- 001/0
34/0- 001/0
31/0- 001/0
33/0 001/0
42/0 001/0
34/0 001/0
39/0 001/0
32/0 001/0
30/0 001/0
33/0 001/0
31/0 001/0
36/0 001/0
33/0 001/0
38/0 01/0
36/0 01/0
31/0 02/0
22/0 05/0
24/0 02/0
31/0 01/0
30/0 01/0
25/0 02/0
30/0 02/0
33/0 01/0
05/0 01/0 .
-
23
108 108 )96/0 = ( .
.
KMO
.KMO 915/0 001/0
. 5
. 69
5 69 6 63
9591/0 . 63 .
-
24 4 89
.
)NEO-FFI ( 42
56
t
.
Z T
. .
. . )1979 .( ) ( .
).1383.( :. ).1908 .( . . )1386.( : .
-
25
. )2002.( – .
.)1381.( :. . )1982.( . . )1375.( :
. . )1386.( NEO-FFI
. . . .)1385.( :
NEO-PI-R NEO-FFI. : .
. )1385(. . : . . )1350.( . .
. )1386.( . :.
. . )1989.( . . )1384.( : . . )1385.( . :.
. )1386.( 87-86 .
. . . . )1986.( . . )1382.( : .
-
26 4 89
. )1380.( ) (. : .
. . . )1386.( :.
. )1360.( . . . )1385.( . : .
-
1 2
:16/2/90 :22/8/90
.
67 ) (
.
45 . 12
.
3 .
1- 2-
-
28 4 89
01/0 .
01/0 .
: .
) 1388.(
1 )2 3 1983 1385 .(
4 5 6 ) 1374 .( 7
. 8 9
1. Self - concept 2. Green berg 3. Mishell 4. Attitude 5 .Percption 6. Impression 7. Semsation8 .Ragerz 9 .Kely
-
... 29
. 1 ) 1380 .(
.
.
. .
)2 1388( .
) 1374 .(
.
.
) 1363 1386 .( 3
) 1373 .(
1 .Kambez 2. Preky 3. academic achierement
-
30 4 89
.
. ) 1373 .(
)
1373 .(
) 1381(.
4/0 6/0 ) 1 1982 . 2 1982 3 1996
1380 .(
4 5 6 7 )2009 ( : .
.
1. Brook over 2. Parssa lacqua 3 .Skalvic4. Hatzigeorgiadis 5. Zourbanos6 .Pounpaki7. Theodoriksy
-
... 31
1 2 3)2009 ( .
)4 1984 1377.(
.
. 5 6
. 7 ) 8
9 2010 .( ) 10 11 2008
1389 .( . )12 13 14 15 2005.(
1. Dermitzaki 2. Leondri3. Goudas4. Marsh5. Self regulation 6. Assessment as learning 7. Assessment 8. Cooper9.Cowie10. Ayrasyan 11 .Rasel12 .Tiwaria13. Lam14. Yuen15. Chan
-
32 4 89
.
1 2 3 ) 4
52006 1388.( .
) 1384 .(
.
.
) 2006 1388(. )6 7 8
8 9 2008 .( )10 112006 .(
.
1. assessment for learning 2.assessment As learning 3. assissment of learning 4. Eirl 5. Katz 6. Gulikers 7. Kester 8. Krichner 9. Bastiaens 10. Alonso-tapia 11. Parado
-
... 33
) 2006
1388.(
. )1 2 2001 ( 3 4 )1987 (
)5 2010 .( )6 2008 .( 7 8 )2009 (
.
) . 9 10 11 2008.( )12 132006.(
1. Sternberg 2 .Grigorenko 3. Brown4. Compione5 .Wang6. Ashwin 7. Ling tan 8. Towndrow 9 .Segers m 10. Martens r 11 .Bosscech 12. Tapia 13.Pardo
-
34 4 89
) 1 2 3 2010 .(
) 4 5 6 2008 .(
) ( )7 8 92010 .(10 11 12 13
)2009 ( .
. )14 152010 .(
)
1. Ruwang 2. Lienkao 3. Wenlin 4. Sengers 5. Martens 6. Bossche 7. Ruwang 8. Lin kaw 9. Wenlin 10.Garmon11. Traphagan 12. Mayrath 13. Trivedi 14. Cooper 15. Coweie
-
... 35
2006 1388 .(
) ( ) 1 2010 .(
)2 2008.(
) ( .
) 2006 1388 .( : 3 4 2006
2005 5 2010 2010 6 2009 7 8 2009 9 10 2009 11 2008 12 2005 .(
)2010 (
1. Hua-wang2. Ashwin3. Tapia 4. Pardo 5. Hua Wang 6. Azar 7. Bailey 8. Tuohy 9. Yi Chang 10. Ting Chen 11. Ashwin 12. Brown
-
36 4 89
.
.
:
.
(
90-1389 171 5094 .
( 15 ) 1 2 2000.( ) ( .
. . 90-
1389 .
1. Cohen2. Manion
-
... 37
. . 7
2 . 2
. 2 .
.
2 .
( : ) (
.
. ) ( 80 . 16
18 12 12 12
8
78 . 16 . .
80 » « » « .
-
38 4 89
- . 6 .
. .
. .
. . 78 .
1060 . 5/14 . 1
1 .
1.
12 330 83/0 14 380 88/0
15 470 74/0 15 590 79/0
1
. - 82/0 78/0 .
1. reliability
-
... 39
1 .
» - « .
. 5 ) ( .
5 . .
. .
.
. 2 .
2. ) =239(
- 504/0 433/0 539/0 512/0 540/0 504/0 - 621/0 512/0 517/0 384/0 433/0 621/0 - 412/0 427/0 453/0 539/0 512/0 412/0 - 397/0 451/0 512/0 517/0 427/0 397/0 - 400/0 540/0 384/0 453/0 451/0 400/0 -
1. validity
-
40 4 89
2 01/0 397/0 621/0 .
.
457 80
. 30/0
. 42 . 6 ) 1383(.
) (72/0 .
( : :
. 12 90 .
-
... 41
3 .
( : . )
( 1 .
-
42 4 89
4.
31 31 36 36
03/12 90/12 77/10 50/13 14/4 74/4 904 82/4
4
. 5
.
5 .
31 31 36 36
93/59 93/57 28/62 39/66 24/12 88/12 21/10 62/8
5 . 6
) ( .
-
... 43
6.
52/8 18/3 71/8 11/3 72/0 61/0
55/8 61/1 97/8 87/1 42/0 62/0 81/7 72/2 77/7 62/2 03/0- 39/1
06/14 96/2 10/13 48/3 97/0- 61/2
22/6 98/1 61/6 85/1 38/0 61/0 77/11 11/3 77/12 76/2 1 71/1
6 . 7
) (
.
7.
58/8 38/2 30/9 14/2 72/0 61/0 86/8 14/2 77/9 10/2 92/0 05/1
36/9 07/2 47/10 68/1 11/1 43/1
63/12 54/3 39/14 01/3 75/1 23/2
58/6 46/1 88/7 11/1 31/1 06/1 25/13 57/2 55/14 79/1 31/1 35/1
-
44 4 89
7 ) (
. .
8 ) (
.
8.
31 31 36 36 129/0 2- 72/2 11/4
67/1 68/3 11/1 05/4
8 ) ( ) (
.
( : ) ( .
.
-
... 45
. )
( ) ( .
1 .
.
. )
21999 1388 .( 3 .
05/0 025/0 )025/0 =2/05/0.(
4 .
. - 5 6
1. MANOVA 2. Adelaide & Pexman3. Bonferrone correction4. multiple collinearity5. Box test6. Smirnov
-
46 4 89
. 9 .
9. F
7 59 55/22 001/0P< 728/0 1 7 59 55/22 001/0P< 728/0 1
7 59 55/22 001/0P< 728/0 1 7 59 55/22 001/0P< 728/0 1
9 ) (
]728/0 =2 001/0P< 55/22 =)59 7(F [ .
. 10
.
-
... 47
10 .
F
413/135 1 413/135 467/69 001/0P< 517/0 1
056/622 1 056/622 193/41 001/0P< 388/0 1 655/4 1 655/4 755/16 001/0P< 205/0 981/0
120/4 1 120/4 324/5 024/0 076/0 623/0
775/21 1 775/21 806/12 001/0P< 165/0 941/0
029/123 1 029/123 060/21 001/0P< 245/0 995/0
051/14 1 051/14 910/17 001/0P< 216/0 986/0 555/1 1 555/1 667/0 417/0 010/0 127/0
10
]517/0 =2 001/0P< 467/69 =)66 1 (F [ ] 388/0 =2 001/0P< 193/41 =)66 1 (F
[ ]205/0 =2 001/0P< 755/16 =)66 1 (F [ ]076/0 =2 025/0P< 324/5 =)66 1 (F [
] 165/0 =2 001/0P< 806/12 =)66 1 (F [ ] 245/0 =2 001/0P< 060/21 =)66 1 (F [ ]216/0 =2 001/0P< 910/17 =)66 1 (F [
.
-
48 4 89
.
] 010/0 =2 417/0P< 667/0 =)66 1 (F [
.
.
.
) 1380 .( 4/0 6/0 ) 1
1982 2 1982 3 1996 1383 .(
2010 )2008( )2005 ( )2006 ( )2009( )2008(
)2009( )2010( )2009( )2009( )2010( )2010( )2010( )2006( )2007 ( .
1. Brookover2. Parssalocqur3. Skalvic
-
... 49
)1384( )1374( )1384( )1378( )1367( )1388 (
. .
. )
( .
) ( .
) (
.
.
.
. . ) .1999.(
. : 1388 . :.
-
50 4 89
. ) .2008 . ( ) 1389 .( : .
) .1385 .( . – .
.) . .( . 1383. : . ) .2006 .( .
1388 . : . ) .1382 . (
TIMSS-R . .
.) .1363 .( . 1363 . : ) .1377 .( . :
. ) .1374 . ( . : .
) .1388 . ( .
.)1388 .( . .
) .1381 .( .
) .1378 .( . .
-
... 51
.) .1386 . ( . ) . ( : .
.) .1384 .( . : .
.) .1384 . ( ) ( : .
.) .1373 . ( . : .
) .1373 .( . .
) .1380 .( . .
) .1367 . ( . 15 16 .
).1375 . ( . : . ) .1388 . ( .
.
Ashwin, p. (2008). Accounting for Structure and agency in ' close up ' research on
teaching, learning and assessment in higher eduction. International Journal of Educational Research. 47, 151-158.
Azer, s. (2009). Problem – based learning in the Fifth, sixth, and seventh grades: Assessment of Students' perceptions. Tcaching and teacher Education. 25.1033-1042.
Barak, M. & Rafaeli, sh. (2004). On – line guestion-posing and peer- assessment as means for web- based knowiedge sharing in learning. Journal of Human – computer Stdudies. 61, 84 -103.
-
52 4 89
Bailey, M. & Tuohy, D. (2009). Student hurses experiences of using a learning contract as a method Of assessment. Nurse Education. 29, 758-762.
Brown, A. (2005). Self – assessment of writing in independent language learning programs: The value of annotated Samples. Assessment writing. 174-191.
Bryant, p. (2009). Self regulation and maral awareness among entreprenears. Journal of Business Venturing. 24, 505,518.
Cooper, B. & cowie, B. (2010). Collabarative research for assessment for learning. Teaching and teacher educatin. 26, 979-986.
Cassidy, S. (2009). Subjectivity and the valid assessment of pre-registration student nurse clinical learning outcomes: Implications for mentors. Nurse Education. 29, 33-39.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (2000). Research methods in education (5td Ed). London: Routledge.
Dearnley, ch. & Meddings, F. (2007). student self-assessment and its impact on learning A pilot study. Nurse Education, 27,333-340.
Dermitzaki, I & Leandari, A & Goudas, M. (2009).Relations between young students'strategic behaviours, domain-specific self-concept, and performance in a problem-solving situation. Learning and Instruction, 19,174-157.
Fong Yang, Y. & Chung Tsai, ch. (2010).conceptions of and approaches to learning through online peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20, 72-83.
Gulfaraz Abbsi, M. Ayaz, A. & khattak. (2010). Negative influence of larg scale assessment on language learning strategies of the secondary school certificate (ssc) students. Procedia social and behavioral sciences, 2, 4938-4942.
Gulikers, j. kester, L. kirschner, p. & Bastiaens, T. (2008). The effect of practical experience on perceptions of assessment authenticity, study approach, and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 18,172-186.
Hatzigeorgiadis, A. zourbanos, N. & Mpoumoaki, S. & theodorakis, y. (2009). Mechanisms underlying the self-talk-performance relationship: The effects of motivational self –confidence and anxiety. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 186 – 192.
Jorman, l. Traphagan, T. Mayrath, M. & Trivedi, A. (2009). Virtual World teaching, experiential learning and assessment: An interdisciplinary communication course in second life. Computers & Education, 53, 169 - 182.
Ling tan A. & towndrow, ph. (2009). Catalyzing student – teacher interactions and teacher learning in science practical formative assessment with digital video technology. Teaching and teacher Education, 25, 61-67.
Miriam M. (2008). Using portfolios for clinical practice learning and assessment: The pre- registration nursing student's perspective. Nurse Education, 28, 873 – 879.
Ru Wang, J. lien kao, H. & Wen Lin, Sh. (2010). Preservice teacher's initial conceptions about assessment of science learning: the coherence with their views of learning science. Teaching and Teacher Education. 26, 522 – 529.
-
... 53
Segers, M. Martens, r. & bossche, p. (2008). Understanding how a case- based assessment instrument influences student teachers learning approaches. Teaching and Teacher Eduration, 24, 1751 – 1764.
Tapia, J. & pardo, A. (2006). Assessment of learning environmet motivational quality from the point of view of secondary and high school learners. Learning and Instruction, 16, 295- 309.
Ting – yi chang. & yi – Ting Chen. (2009). Cooperativ learning in e-learning: apeer assessment of Student – centered using consistens fuzzy preference. Expert Systems with Appilications, 36, 8342-8349.
Wang, T. (2010). Web-based dynamic assessment: Taking assessment as teaching and learning strategy for improving student's e-learning officetiveness. Computers & Education, 54, 1157-1160.
Tiwari, A. lam, D. yuen, k. & Chan, R. (2005). Student learning in clinical nurcing education: perception of the yelatininship between assessment and learning. Nurse Education, 25, 299-308.
-
1 2
3
:21/2/90 :22/8/90
)SPSI(
87-88
. 200 154 46 )SPSI (
. )85/0 =( 5
)88/0 =R( . 5 :
)APS( )RPS( )ICPS( )PPO ( )NPO (.
1- 2- 3-
-
56 4 89
)322/0 =R2 ( )304/0 =R2 ( .
)53/0 =R( ) ( .
)SPSI ( .
: .
1 2 )1996 (
. .
3 4 5 )1996 371 ( ) 2005.(
.
1. Mathur 2. Rutherford 3. Deshler 4. dllis 5. lens
-
... 57
.
. .
.
) 2005 (
. » «
.
.
) 1383.(
.
.
-
58 4 89
:
.
. :
: : ) ( : ) ( : : .
– :
: : ) ( : )
( : ) .(
) .(
-
... 59
.
. .
/ . .
. .
.
. .
.
87-88 3870 .
) (
. .
-
60 4 89
. 223 200 .
46 154 44 156 ) 1.(
1.
46 29 17
451 15 139200 44 156
)SPSI(1 )SPSI-R:D,ZURILA (
. ) (
) 1999-1982 .( 52 5 . 5 25 5
. . )PPO( )5- 7– 14 (
)NPO( )2-4-9-13- 22 (
1. Social problem solving inventory
-
... 61
. )RPS( )2-8-16-20 -
21-24-25 ( . )APS( )1-10-12-17-18 ( - )6-11-15-19 -23 ( . )PPO, RPS(
. )ICPS , APS , NPO( .
)SPSI( )RPS, PPO (
. . )APS, ICPS, NPI (
.
. )SPSI ( .
. 68/0 91/0 69/0
95/0 ) . 2000 .(
) 2000 .( )SPSI ( .
. 77/0IPS=
-
62 4 89
76/0= NPO 75/0 =PPO 67/0= RPS - 66/0= ICPS .
74/0 ) 2007.(
2 70 .
. . 6
5 . 5 ) (
) ( )1( ) ( )5 ( . )1380 ( 63/0= R
) ( )84/0 (
)59/0( )64/0( )54/0( )51/0( )50/0 ( .
) ( 1961 . 160
5 . 32 . »
.
-
... 63
: 91/0
88/0 85/0 81/0 91/0 94/0 . .
... .
5 : ) 1953.( .
:
2.
7344/9 12/3 78/18 46 19716/11 46/3 19/16 46 25424/13 68/3 36/17 46 33216/32 04/4 45/27 46 4
4964/2 58/1 56/13 46 58176/149 24/12 36/93 46 6
-
64 4 89
3.
7344/9 12/3 78/18 46 19716/11 46/3 19/16 46 25424/13 68/3 36/17 46 33216/16 04/4 45/27 46 4
4964/2 58/1 56/13 46 58176/149 24/12 36/93 46 6
.
:
. )01/0p< ( )86/0 =KMO ( )6/785 =BTS( .
30/0 . 40/0
. )1 ( .
-
... 65
Scree Plot
Component Number
252321191715131197531
Eige
nval
ue8
6
4
2
0
4 .
-
66 4 89
4 .
704/0 2 715/0 4 69/0 9 788/0 13 555/0 22 72/0 1 456/0 10 46/0 12 682/0 17 696/0 18
37/0 3393/0 8743/0 16772/0 2039/0 21
497/0 24442/0 25
34/0 536/0 741/0 14
775/0 6437/0 11786/0 15484/0 19502/0 23
-
... 67
5.
1215/785/2885/28296/218/904/38371/186/69/44427/111/502/50522/187/489/54
5 859/28
. 13 788/0 22 555/0 .
5 182/9 . 7
867/6 . 3 112/5
. 5 878/4 .
54% .
:
. 6
-
68 4 89
.
6.
14 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
1
1 21 47/0 3
1 32/0 52/0 41 33/0 44/0 57/0 5
1 458/0 24/0 83/0 58/0 61 57/0 77/0 71/0 69/0 85/0 7
1 5/0- 65/0- 36/0- 5/0- 48/0- 62/0- 14
.
.
-
... 69
:
7 32/0 85/0
.
:
7 .
7/0 17/0 28/0 3
79/0 426/0 585/0 6
7/0 7/0 8/0 .79. 62 . 85. 85/0
.
-
70 4 89
: 8 . ) (
001/0 65/0 40 1001/0 72/0 40 2001/0 78/0 40 3001/0 68/0 40 4001/0 62/0 40 5
)9(
SPSI 01/0 . SPSI APS )65/0( ICPS)72/0( NPO)78/0 (RPS )68/0 (PPO )62/0 ( .
71/0 .
)SPSI(
.
. )2007 (
64 ./76/0 69/0 68/0 71/0 .
. 6
-
... 71
. )2007( )2002 ( )1990 (
. 6 .
)2007 ( )1990 ( . 5 )
( .
. .
.
.
.
) .1369 .( . .
) .1383 .( . : .
-
72 4 89
).1377 .( 9 15 . .
).1384 .( . . .
) .1383 .( . :. ).1380 .( . :.
).1374 .( .
) .1381 .( . .
).1373 .( . : .
anderveen,W.J.,Cohen,M.L.,Trotter,M.R.D., &Collins,L.F. ( 2008) .” an, Daniel. (1998). highligh of Emotional intelligence www.yahoo.com Bar-on,reuven,parker,D,A,james. (2000). The handbook Of Emotionl Intelligence.
Sanfrancisco, jossy- Boss Book. First edition D’Zurilla,T.J.,&Nezu,A.M.(1982). social problem solving in adults.In P.C.Ke -
dall(Ed.).Advances in cognative-behavioral research and therapy(vol.) New Yourk:Academic Press.
D’zurilla. T.J.(1990). Problem solving training for effevtive stress management and prevention. Journal of cognitive psychoth.
Derkzen ,Dena maria .(2007). imulsivity , social problem solving & Alkol dependency as contributors to agressation in provincially icrarcerted offenders.
D. Zurilla, J . and Nezu , EM (1982) social problem solving . In P.C. Kendall (ED) . T . Evans . S.W & short ,E.J. (1991). A qualitative & serial analysis of social problem
solving in aggressive boys . jornal of abnormal psychology (19 ,331 _ 340). Murry,B.(2002).”Girls wound each other with invisible weapons, study suggests. APA
monitor,Vol.29.NO.5. Retrived January,2001. Nezu, A.M.(1985). Differences in psychological distress between effective and
ineffective problem solvers. Journal of Counselling Psychology,32-135-138.
-
1 2
3
:16/2/90 :22/8/90
) 1992( .
464 )149 315 ( 5
. )
( )1992 ( .
.
1- 2- 3-
-
74 4 89
. .
.
: .
. 1
1267 ) 2007 ( : »
.«
.
.
.
2 . ) 2001(
) 2000 2000 1990.(
1. Bekan 2. epistemological beliefs
-
... 75
) 2002 .(
. :1- »«
2- 3 -
)2002 ( .
: ) 1989
1997( ) 1990(
) 1989(
) 1990(
)2007 .(1 )1985 2000 (
1. Slivar
-
76 4 89
. . )1983 (
. . )1988 (
.
.
)1998 (
. )2003 ( . )2005(
1 2 3 .
.
)1992 (
) 1992 1998 2003 2007.(
: ) 1. achivement 2. self- efficacy 3. academic motivation
-
... 77
.(
) 2003.(
, . .
.
5
) ( 1389 - 1388 . 464 )149 315
( 5 ) ( . :
5 ) ( .
.
-
78 4 89
.
1 ( )1992 (
) ( .
.
6 . : 1 ( : . 2( :
. 3( : . 4( : ) ( . 5( :
. 6( : . )2003( 599 .
)1992 ( 70 / . )2003 ( 599
72/0 .
-
... 79
. 60/0 .
. .
.
2 ( 63 )1990 (
. )1990 ( :
) 1992 .( )1993 (
.
)1990( .
) 1992.( 74/0 .
63/0 85/0 ) 1990 .(
54/0 71/0 . )1993 ( )1997 (
-
80 4 89
70/0 45/0 . )1374( 47/0
28/0 47/0 .
)63/0( .
1
.
1 .
464 50/19 04/4 464 12/17 90/4
464 01/18 14/4 464 04/20 47/3
464 84/16 59/4 464 32/17 29/3
)( 464 45/91 10/9
-
... 81
1 - - 2 3 . - - )67/0(
)41/832 001/0p
-
82 4 89
2 . )
(
)(
)(
) (
)( )
(
1 76/0 2 71/0 3 46/0 4 78/0 5 74/0 6 71/0 7 79/0 8 77/0 9 79/0 10 81/0 11 81/0 12 79/0
13 77/0 14 70/0 15 88/0 16 91/0 17 84/0 18 64/0 19 64/0 20 73/0 21 80/0 22 78/0 23 61/0 24 72/0 25 75/0 26 48/0 27 77/0 28 64/0 29 67/0 30 83/0 31 61/0 36 58/0 33 59/0 34 73/0 35 80/0 36 59/0
)1 7 13 19 25 31 ( )2 8 14
20 26 32 ( )3 9 15 21 27 33 ( - )4 10 16 22 28 34 ( )5 11 17 23 29 35 (
)6 12 18 24 30 36 (.
1 .
-
... 83
1
.
1
. 200 .
63/0 .
3.
68/0 67/0 58/0 64/0 74/0 82/0 79/0
64/0 73/0 62/0 68/0 69/0 76/0 83/0
100
. 68/0 )68/0 67/0 58/0 64/0 74/0 82/0 79/0 ( .
)3.(
1. Concurrent Validity
-
84 4 89
. )3.( .
.
. .
.
. )1992 (
. ) 1992 2003 2007 (
. )1992 (
69 .
-
... 85
. )1990 (
.
. .
. 83/0 58/0 .
)1992( )2003 ( )2007 ( .
.
. .
.
.
.
-
86 4 89
De Corte, E., Op,t Eynde, P., Verschaffel , L.(2002).Knowing what to believe: the
relevance of students, mathematical beliefs for mathematics education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Garofalo, J. (1989). Beliefs and their influence on mathematical performance. Mathematics Teacher, 82, 502-505.
Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353-382.
Kardash, C. M., & Scholes, R.J. (1996). Effects of preexisting beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 260-271.
Kardash, C.M., & Howell, K.L. (2000). Effects of epistemological beliefs and topic-specific beliefs on undergraduates, cognitive and strategic processing of dual – positional text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 524-535.
Kloosterman, P. Stage, F.K .(19 8). Self – confidence and motivation in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology,80.,345-351.
Kloosterman,P. Stage, F.K .(1992).measuring beliefs about mathematical problem solving . School Science and Mathematics , 92, 109-115.
Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching . American Educational Research Journal, 27, 29-63.
Lucangeli, D.,Coli, G.,& Bosco, P.(1997). Metacognitional awareness in good and poor math problem solvers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 12, 209-212.
Mason, L. (2000). Role of anomalous data and epistemological beliefs in middle students,s theory change on two constroversial topics. European Journal of psychology of Education, 15, 329-346.
Mason, L. (2003). High school students, beliefs about maths, mathematical problem solving, and their achievement in maths: A cross-sectional study. Educational Psychology, 23, 73-85, 2003.
Schoenfeld, A.H. (1983). Beyond the purely cognitive: Beliefs system, social cognition, and metacognition as driving forces in intellectual performance. Cognitive Science, 7, 329-363
Schoenfeld, A.H.(1988). When good teachin leads to bad results: the disasters of " well taught" mathematics classes. Educational Psychologist, 23, 145-166.
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal for Educational Psychology , 82, 498-504.
Schommer-Aikins, Marlene. K. Duell, Orpha. Hutter, Rosetta.(2005). Epistemological Beliefs, Mathematical Problem-Solving Beliefs, and Academic Performance of Middle School Students. The Elementary School Journal,105,289-304.
Schommer, M.(1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85,3,406-411.
-
... 87
Schommer, M., Walker, K. (1995). Are epistemological beliefs similar across domains?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 424–432. Schommer, M., Dunnell, P. (1997). The potential influence of epistemological beliefs on
gifted underachievers. Roeper Review, 19, 153–156. Steiner,L,. A. (2007). The Effect of Personal And Epistemological Beliefs on
Performance in College Developmental Mathematics Class. Department of
-
1 2
3
:3/3/90 :22/8/90
85 -63 .
. 55 41 59 36
. 4 .
CMA (Comprehensive Meta Analysis)SPSS . . t
) ( .
1- -2 3-
4. systematic review
-
90 4 89
.
. –
.
.
: .
-
.
. .
.
.
.
-
91
. )12006.(
.
) 21989.(
.
) ( .
) 1384.(
.
) 1381.(
. .
1. David D. Burns 2. Raymond Depaulo & keith Russel Ablow
-
92 4 89
.
.
.
.
) 1386.( .
.
. .
)11983 .(
.
.
1. Glass
-
93
) 1376.(
.
)12001 1380.( .
.
)21987 1381.(
.
.
.
1. Sadock 2. Sarason
-
94 4 89
) 1380.(
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
95
. ) 1385.(
.
. .
) 11990 1384.(
1385-1363
.
.
1. Leonardo & Joakino
-
96 4 89
.
1 .
. 41
36 . 1385-1363 . 55
41 59 36 .
CMA2 SPSS . CMA
SPSS
. CMA .
1. systematic review 2. Comprehensive Meta Analysis
-
97
. :
1- 41 36
. 1363 1385 . 658/53 % 85-79 .
888/80 % 78-71 85- 79 444/44 % .
2- 203 . 162 41 . 195
. 128 67 . 3- 5880 1684 1808 2388 .
5318 2055 1941 1322 . 7
3 31 . 6 9
21 .
-
98 4 89
4- 829/26 %
. - 56/30%
. 5-
146/34 % . 888/38 %
. 6-
268/29 % . 556/55 % .
7- t 731/70 . t
444/69 . 8- 122/95 % . 333/83% .
. 9- 23 74/19 %
. 43 70/50 %
-
99
.
. 10- : -
: - -
: .
1.
z p
70 1.512 373. 139. 781. 2.244 4.050 0.000 71-72 683. 119. 014. 450. 916. 5.750 0.000
73-74 162. 113. 013. 060.- 384. 1.428 0.153 74 2.530 205. 042. 2.128 2.932 12.344 0.000 74 148. 142. 020. 129.- 426. 1.049 0.294 75 1.571 278. 077. 1.027 2.115 5.660 0.000
-
100 4 89
74 1.622 304. 092. 1.028 2.217 5.346 0.000 76 1.212 199. 039. 823. 1.602 6.103 0.000
75 565. 129. 017. 313. 818. 4.383 0.000 77 286. 117. 014. 057. 515. 2.448 0.014
78 1.448 277. 076. 906. 1.990 5.234 0.000 80-
81 1.424 118. 014. 1.192 1.656 12.027 0.000
81 464. 175. 031. 121. 806. 2.655 0.008 82 726. 262. 069. 212. 1.240 2.770 0.006 83 1.079 276. 076. 537. 1.621 3.904 0.000
82-83 307. 381. 145. 440.- 1.053 806. 0.420 83 376. 137. 019. 108. 654. 2.746 0.006 84 448. 111. 012. 231. 665. 4.052 0.000
84 151. 126. 016. 096.- 398. 1.199 0.231 85 6.857 412. 170. 7.664- 6.050 16.655 0.000
85 586. 239. 057. 118. 1.054 2.453 0.014 588. 036. 001. 518. 0.658 16.476 0.000
21 .
p 71-72 73-74 74 75
77 81 82 82-83 83 84 85 70 74 75
74 76 78 80-81 83 85 . 6/0 .
-
101
71-72 73-74 74 75 77 81
82 82-83 83 8484 70 74 75 75 75 78 80-81 83 85 . 6/0 . :
.
2.
z p
74 1.262 474. 225. 333. 2.191 2.663 008. 74 1.494 594. 353. 330. 2.658 2.516 012. 75-76 1.329 426. 181. 459. 2.163 3.123 002. 75 070. 218. 048. 358. 498. 320. 749.
76 1.113 507. 257. 120. 2.105 2.196 028. 76-77
504. 371. 138. 233.- 1.231 1.359 174.
77-78
146. 037. 001. 072. 219. 3.892 0.000
78 309. 132. 017. 050. 568. 2.336 019. 79-
80 563. 170. 029. 229. 896. 3.306 001.
82 2.950 366. 134. 233. 667. 8.066 0.000
-
102 4 89
82 400. 412. 170. 408.- 1.208 970. 332. 81-
82 1.709 453. 205. 821. 2.596 3.774 0.000
83 6.434 642. 412. 5.177 7.692 10.028 0.000 83 7.823 726. 527. 6.401 9.246 10.780 0.000 83 010. 239. 057. 478.- 459. 040. 968. 84 1.585 419. 175. 765. 2.406 3.787 0.000 84 559. 188. 035. 927.- 191. 2.975 0.003
85 705. 177. 031. 359. 1.051 3.991 0.000 85 277. 106. 011. 069. 484. 2.614 009.
260. 031. 001. 199. 320. 8.391 0.000.
p 77-78
78 79-80 84 85 3 ./ .
75-76 75 77-78 78 79-80 83 85 85
3/0 .
-
103
. .
3.
z p
66-67 400. 226. 051. 042.- 843. 1.773 076. 77 099. 128. 017. 153. 351. 770. 442. 70-
71 445. 105. 011. 240. 650. 4.245 0.000
70 608. 145. 021. 325. 891. 4.208 0.000 70 849. 213. 045. 432. 1.266 3.987 0.000
7-73
1.149 241. 058. 676. 1.622 4.762 0.000
73 192. 183. 033. 166. 551. 1.051 293. 73 182. 100. 010. 014.- 379. 1.819 069. 74 072. 200. 040. 320. 464. 360. 719.
74
241. 185. 034. 122. 604. 1.302 193.
78 1.711 243. 059. 1.234 2.188 7.031 0.000 78 250. 141. 020. 026. 527. 1.773 076.
78 3.700 886. 784. 1.964 5.436 4.177 0.000 78 1.717 288. 083. 1.152 2.281 5.959 0.000
79 153. 183. 033. 512. 205. 839. 402. 80-
81 376. 097. 009. 186. 566. 3.873 0.000
81 170. 087. 008. 0.000 340. 1.964 050. 82 079. 183. 033. 279. 436. 430. 667.
-
104 4 89
83 881. 148. 022. 590. 1.171 5.937 0.000 371. 034. 001. 305. 438. 10.931 0.000
p 78 78 78 4/0 .
78 78 78
5/0 . .
.
4.
z p
75 1.112 450. 202. 230. 1.993 2.472 013. 74-75 1.234 282. 079. 682. 1.786 4.381 0.000
77 570. 119. 014. 337. 804. 4.794 0.000 78 188. 087. 008. 017. 360. 2.157 031.
78 359. 109. 012. 146. 572. 3.299 001. 79 6.137 1.286 1.653 3.618 8.657 4.774 0.000
79 798. 171. 029. 462. 1.133 4.660 0.000 78 1.586 338. 114. 924. 2.249 4.692 0.000 80 1.976 386. 149. 1.220 2.733 5.123 0.000
-
105
81-82 121. 177. 031. 227. 468. 680. 496. 80 1.699 583. 340. 555. 2.842 2.912 004.
84 1.895 432. 957. 290. 3.500 11.832 0.000 84 1.580 393. 155. 810. 2.351 4.018 0.000 84 1.294 232. 054. 840. 1.749 5.583 0.000 85 1.676 368. 135. 956. 2.396 4.560 0.000
85
637. 200. 040. 245. 1.030 3.182 001
552. 047. 002. 459. 645. 11.658 0.000
p 77 78 78 70 81-82
. .
77 78 78 79 81-82
.
. .
t 15 21 . 6 ./ .
t 11 17 .
t
-
106 4 89
) ( ... .
. .
t
5/0 .
. t 78 85
. .
.
. .
9 . 4/0
. 81 . 82-83
. 1 .
-
107
.
. 8 5
5/0 . 77-76 .
. .
. 6 4
. 6/0 .
4/0 .
7 3 5/0 .
.
. .
-
108 4 89
. – 7 8/0 .
85 1/0 .
9 4 6/0 .
77-78 2/0 .
. .
- .
- 5/0 . 4
.
– .
.
-
109
.
.
.
.)1380( .
52 79 : . .)1386( .
: . .)1385( . ) (
: ) 1989.( .)1385.( ) ( :
) 2006.( ).1376( . : :
. ) .1381.( : .
.)1384( . 27 79-51.
-
110 4 89
.)1380( . ) ( : ) 2001.( .)1381( . )
(: ) 1987.( .)1385(. .
.)1368( . : ) 1983.(
.)1384( . ) ( : ) 1990.(
Borenstein , M ; Hedges , L ; Higgins , J ; Rothstein , H . (2009) . Introduction to Meta
Analysis ,Newjersy, willy Manual &Toturial comprihensive meta analysis(www.meta_analysis .com)
-
1
2 3
:12/3/90 :22/8/90
. .
. .
. 21 .
.
. 507 162
1- 2- 3-
-
112 4 89
174 85 47 39 .
) ( .
: .
: .
. 1 ) 1379.(
. )2
3 2006 4 2008.( 5 :
)6 1998.( .
1. Vives 2. Dursun 3. Çoban 4. Y ld z 5. Plato 6. Sibley
-
113
)1 2007.(
)2 2005.(
.
. . . .
) 1379(.
)3 2009.(
.
)4 5 2003.(
1. Batista 2. Handscomb 3. Erdogan 4. Goos 5. Spencer
-
114 4 89
) 2005.( . 1 .
2 3 1957 .
)1384( .
. . )1986(
:
- ) 4(: .
- ) 5(: .
- ) 6(:
.
1. van Hiele geometric thinking theory 2. Pierre van Hiele 3. Dina van Hiele-Geldof 4. recognition/visualization 5. analysis 6. informal deduction
-
115
- ) 1(:
.
- )2(: .
:
- 3: . n 1n- .
)4 2006(.
- 5: )6 1982.(
- 7: ) 1982.(
1. formal deduction 2. rigor3. fixed sequence 4. Thompson 5. adjacency 6. Usiskin 7. distinction
-
116 4 89
- 1: )
2006.(
. .
. :
.
. .
. .
336 171 .
1. reduction
-
117
. 27 .
.
. .
) 1( .
. 30
.
1.
.
7
1 2 3 45 6
-
118 4 89
.
.
12 1620 21
.
8
.
15 22
.
9 10
.
11 13 14
17
18 19
.
23 24 2526 2
7
-
119
1 2 .
)3 4 1947 1388( .
) 1387.( . 2
4 7 18 19 24 25 . .
2.
1. difficulty index 2. discrimination index 3. Kaplan 4. Saccuzzo
1 78/33 426/0* 714/0 15 54/17 505/0* 706/0 2 87/50 138/0* 730/0 16 45/83 421/0* 712/0 3 70/0 399/0* 714/0 17 30/83 388/0* 715/0 4 92/50 065/0 732/0 18 50/0 061/0- 745/0 5 77/50 230/0* 725/0 19 70/50 062/0- 737/0 6 68/33 228/0* 722/0 20 40/0 372/0* 716/0 7 77/50 049/0 735/0 21 25/83 298/0* 721/0 8 48/33 413/0* 712/0 22 73/33 275/0* 722/0
-
120 4 89
05/0*p<
783/0 .
.
) 1947 1388(.
1 . . .
.
.
) 1387.(
9 22/50 299/0* 721/0 23 69/17 266/0* 723/0 10 50/0 194/0* 728/0 24 54/17 192/0 745/0 11 35/83 469/0* 709/0 25 22/50 047/0 736/0 12 19/17 328/0* 720/0 26 41/67 263/0* 723/0 13 50/42 292/0* 721/0 27 22/50 137/0* 731/0 14 30/0 426/0* 712/0
-
121
1
2 )KMO( . KMO 697/0 60/0 ) 1387(.
) 3(.
3. KMO
3
. .
. : . 1
4 .
1. Bartlett’s test of Sphericity 2. Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin3. Varimax rotation
KMO 697/0 410/489 210 001/0 p<
-
122 4 89
1.
4.
) (
20 740/0 21 696/0 12 664/0 16 454/0
)(
3 774/0 1 727/0 5 620/0
)
(
22 701/0 15 658/0 8 548/0
) (
10 743/0 14 642/0 17 460/0 9 454/0
-
123
) ( 26 788/0 23 587/0 11 486/0
. 21 .
. 4 7 18 19 24 25 .
. . »
« . » « .
» « .
» « . »
« .
. .
-
124 4 89
.
.
:
.
.
.
. )1387.( . . )1384.(
80 22 -12 . . )1379.( 60 -59
23 -18 . . . : )1388.(
.
-
125
. )1379.( .... .
Battista M. J. (2007). The Development of Geometric and Spatial Thinking, In F. k. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, Vol. 2, pp. 843-908, Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Edrogan T., Akkaya R. and Çelebi Akkaya S.(2009). The Effect of the van Hiele Model Based Instruction on the Creative Thinking Levels of 6th Grade Primary School Students, Journal of Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, Vol.9, No.1, pp.181-194.
Goos M. and Spencer T. (2003). Properties of Shape, Mathematics-Making Waves. Proceeding of the Nineteenth Biennial Conference of the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers. pp. 424-434, Inc. Adelaide: AAMT Inc.
Handscomb K.(2005). Image-Based Reasoning in Geometry, MSc Thesis, Faculty of Education, Simon Fraser University.
Sibley T. Q. (1998). The Geometric Viewpoint: A Survey of Geometries, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
Thompson E. (2006). Euclid, the van Hiele Levels, and the Geometer’s Sketchpad, MSc Thesis, Florida Atlantic University.
Usiskin Z. (1982). “Van Hiele Levels and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry”, University of Chicago.
Y ld z C., Ayd n M., and Kö c D. (2009). Comparing the Old and New 6th - 8th Grade Mathematics Curricula in Terms of van Hiele Understanding Levels for Geometry, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 1, pp. 731-736.
-
STAXI-2
–STAXI-2
Spielberge
-
128 4 89
19
.
.
.
: .
1
)2 3 2004( .
-4 )5 1994(.
1. Anger 2. Berkowitz 3. Harmon Jones 4. Neuroendocrine 5. Smith
-
) ( - ... 129
)1 2000(
)2 2006( ) 3 1996( )4 1999 ( . .
)5 1993 6 1996 7 2002(. 8 9 ) 10 2003( )11 2008.(
. 12 1970 ) 13 1972
14 1986( . - 15 )STAXI) ( 1988 (
44 . )1996 ( STAXI STAXI-2 .
1. Davidson 2. Strike. 3. Deffenbacher 4. Spielberger 5. Fava 6. Gould 7. Barlow 8. Course 9. Outcome 10. Berenbaum 11. Moscovitch 12. Self-report 13. Zelin M,Adler O,myersen P.Angeo 14. Siegel J . 15. State and Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI)
-
130 4 89
44 57 .STAXI-2 :1-
2-
. )1996(
.
) 1 2 3
2004( ) 4 1997( )5 6 7 2003( )8 9 10 1999( )11
12 13 1997( )-14 15 16 2001 17 1999(
1. Van Kleef 2. De Dreu 3. Manstaed 4. London 5. Linqvest 6. Daderman 7. Hellstrom 8. Berteyrou 9. Bruchon 10. Schweitzer 11. Kassinove 12. Suhkodolosky 13. Eckhardt 14. Miguel-Tobal 15. Casado 16. Cano-Vindel 17. Moscoso
-
) ( - ... 131
.
) 1997 1999( ) 2003
1997( .
) 2004 2003( . ) 1997
2003 2004(
. ) 1997( .
STAXI-2 ) 2003
1997 1997 ( .
.
.
. STAXI-2
-
132 4 89
)1 2002 2 2 2005 3 2007.(
STAXI – 2
. ) ( 4 . 6 )
( )
( 5
. STAXI-2 6
STAXI-2 . )7 8 2009.(
STAXI-2 ) 1387 ( )
( )
1. Shek 2. Shek, Chan, & Lee 3. Maxwell 4. ( 2 (1494) = 3786.07, SRMR = 0.09, RMSEA = 0.06 (90% CI = 0.05–0.06), CFI = 0.84) 5. (( 2 (998) = 2102.70, SRMR = 0.06, RMSEA = 0.05 (90%CI = 0.04–0.05), CFI = 0.90) 6. Confirmatory factor analysis 7. Jonathan 8. Denis
-
) ( - ... 133
(
STAXI-2 .
) 1389 ( STAXI-2
STAXI-2 .
: 15 3 1 15
11 4
1 4 3 .
STAXI-2 . STAXI-2
. -
.
-
134 4 89
1 ) ( . )
( . .
.
. ) 1983( .
) 1983(.
- . :
6 1386 1389
. .
100 )2 1995 2001 ( 200 ) 1996
1. Validity 2. Ding
-
) ( - ... 135
2001 ( . 553
.
STAXI-2 ) 1999( . 57 .
. 4
4 : 4 :
. 12 15 . ) (
.
15
) .( 5 : )
( ) ( )
.(
10 ) (
) .(
-
136 4 89
2 4 : ) ( )
.(2 .
8
) .(
8
) ( ) (.
8
) .(
8
) (.
-
) ( - ... 137
.
STAXI-2 .
553
)( . )
( )55/9( 17/31 . 66-17 .178 )32 (% 372 )68 (% . 258 )46(% 295 )53 (%
.
1
:1 ( 2 ( ) LISREL – 8.7 .(
STAXI-2 :
2 STAXI -2
1. Constract validity 2. Factor extraction
-
138 4 89
1 . )1996( ) (
50/0 . ) 1999 ( ) – 2001 (
. 2 )1999(
. 1 )3 1954 19614( )5 1966 ( .
30 /0 . )1999(
. A B
) 96 /1 ( .
- . ) ULS (
ML . 1 ) 6 1996 .(
.
1. Principle axis factoring 2. Fabrigar,Wegener, MacCallum, & Strahan. 3. Guttman 4. Kaiser 5. Cattel 6. MacCallum
-
) ( - ... 139
STAXI-2 .
:2 ) ( d.f ) ( SRMR )
( GFI ) ( AGFI ) ( IFI ) ( NFI ) ( CFI ) (. 95/0
) 1 1993( . RMSEA 05/0 05/0 08/0 08/0 1/0
1/0 ) 1993 .(ECVI
) 1993.(
STAXI-2 ) (553
1 . 60
. 2 (KMO) 93 /0 93 /0 91 /0
. 3 130/5620 86 /3695 81 /2070
105 0001/0 P< .
1. Browne& Cudeck 2. Kaiser – Meyer Olkin (KMO) 3. Bartlettd test of Sphericity
-
140 4 89
1 )3 ( .
5 3 ) 1 2 3 4 6 10 13 15 .( 5 2
) 5 7 8 9 11 12 14 .( 4 .
. ) (
) ( . . .
) 1.(
) A ( . ) (
) ( 15 ) 1 2 3 6 10 ( ) 4 9 12 13 15 ( ) 5 7 8 11 14 (
. .
) B( .
) ( ) ( 15 8
-
) ( - ... 141
7 )
( . 2 B A )
1993(.
2
57 . )KMO )895/0 90/0 86/0
. 97 /2012 88 /1401 38 /637 . 45 0001/0P< .
3 )2 ( .
6 ) 16 17 18 21 22 24( 4 ) 19 20 23 25( .
24
. 19
) 3.(
-
142 4 89
) A ( . 22 24
. A . A
) ( ) ( 8 ) 16
17 18 21 ( ) 19 20 23 25 ( . .
B . 19 )1
2001 ( . B A ) 4.(
3 45 . )KMO( 94/0 92/0
89/0 . 81/6689 89 /4377 57 /2604
. 496 0001/0P< . 5 16
. 12
1. Byrne
-
) ( - ... 143
4 .
. 51 51 31 .
.
) A( ) ( ) ( ) 27 31 35 39 43 47 51 55( ) 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57( ) 26 30 34 38 42 46 50 54 (
)28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 ( . SRMR GFI AGFI
. B
16 31 33 37 49 53 57
96/1 R2 . 35 39
) 2001 .( 31 33 49 57 96/1 R2 ) 2001( . B
A .
-
144 4 89
1. STAXI-2 ) ( )553n = (
.................. 2 1 2 1 2 1
81/0 78/0 78/0 1- . 76/0 75/0 77/0 2- . 83/0 75/0 76/0 1 – . 72/0 78/0 74/0 3- . 65/0 73/0 72/0 15-
. 61/0 61/0 62/0 13- .
37/0- 53/0 34/0- 55/0 35/0 - 54/0 4- . 61/0 52/0 53/0 6- .
90/0- 99/0- 97/0- 11- . 89/0- 90/0- 91/0- 14- . 82/0- 76/0- 79/0- 8- . 60/0- 63/0- 56/0- 5- . 67/0- 56/0- 53/0- 12-
. 58/0- 55/0- 51/0- 7- 55/0- 58/0- 52/0- 9- . 20 /1 15 /8 16 /1 52 /7 19/1 66 /7 )Eigenvalues( 99 /7 31 /54 77 /7 13 /50 94 /8 16 /51
62% 58% 60%
-
) ( - ... 145
2. A B
ECVI RMSEA CFI NFI IFI AGFI GFI SRMR P< d.f X2
80/0 08/0
)088/0-07/0(
95/0 94/0 95/0 88/0 92/0 057/0 001./ 81 357 A
76/0 076/0 )084/0-
068/0(
00/1 99/0 00/1 99/0 99/0 048/0 001/0 83 04/346 B
93/0 078/0 )089/0-
068/0(
95/0 93/0 95/0 87/0 91/0 049/0 001/0 83 90/273 A
88/0 074/0 )085/0-
064/0(
00/1 99./ 00/1 99/0 99/0 048/0 001./ 84 42/257 B
80/1 11/0 )12/0-
095/0(
91/0 88/0 91/0 77/0 85/0 097/0 001./ 82 88/259 A
70/1 11/0 )12/0-
095/0(
00/1 99/0 00/1 98/0 99/0 067/0 001./ 84 263 B
-
146 4 89
3. STAXI-2 ) ( )553n= (
.....
1 2
1
2
1 2
17- . 85/0 84/0 83/0 18- . 78/0 77/0 79/0 16- . 77/0 78/0 75/0 21- . 69/0 62/0 75/0 22- .
52/0 44/0 66/0
24- .
35/0 27/0 30/0 46/0
25- .
84/0 84/0 84/0
20- .
66/0 68/0 59/0
23- .
54/0 67/0 33/0 35/0
19- .
32/0 34/0 20/0 47/0 51/0 13/0
)Eigenvalues( 56 /4 21 /1 67 /4 15 /1 36 /4 37 /1 61 /
45 06 /12 72 /
46 53 /
11 61 /
43 76 /
13 57% 58% 57%
-
) ( - ... 147
4. A B
ECVI RMSEA CFI NFI IFI AGFI GFI SRMR P< d.f X2
10/0 012/0
)04/0- 0/0(
00/1 00/1 00/1 99/0 00/1 027/0 36./ 16 38/17 A
10/0 00/0 )01/0-
00/0(
00/1 00/1 00/1 99./ 00/1 024/0 95/0 15 25/7 B
12/0 00/0 )04/0-
00/0(
00/1 00/1 00/1 99/0 00/1 028/0 69/0 12 17/9 A
17/0 00/0 )03/0-
00/0(
00/1 00/1 00/1 99/0 00/1 034/0 28/0 25 43/21 B
55/0 035/0 )08/0-0/0
00/1 98/0 00/1 97/0 99./ 056/0 25/0 17 58/20 A
37/0 00/0 )04./-
00/0(
00/1 99/0 00/1 98/0 99/0 046/0 25/0 24 41/19 B
-
148 4 89
5. STAXI-2 )553n= (
I II III I II III I II III
36- . 80/0 77/0 83/0 56- . 78/0 82/0 72/0 44-
. 76/0 70/0 87/0
40- .
71/0 66/0 79/0
48- .
80/0 65/0 74./
54- .
76/0 66./ 66./
32- .
78/0 66/0 73/0
42- . 63/0 57/0 72/0 50-
. 71/0 63/0 62/0
46- .
61/0 56/0 67/0
38- .
59/0 54/0 65/0
52- .
61/0 59/0 62/0
26- .
52/0 46/0 58/0
28- .
51/0 45./ 59/0
-
) ( - ... 149
30- . 47/0 47/0 47/0 34-
. 47/0 44/0 49/0
47- .
56/0 56/0 43/0
51- .
54/0 38/0 58/0 30/0 64/0
35- .
54/0 56/0 42/0
43- .
51./ 49/0 42/0
57-
.
51/0 47/0 46/0
55- . 46/0 45/0 36/0 39- .
46/0 52/0 33/0
33- .
45/0 46/0 42/0
27- . 36/0 40/0 36/0 53-
. 44/0 41/0 50/0