Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A short German version of the Self Description Questionnaire I : theoretical and empirical comparability

  • A. Katrin Arens
  • , Alexander Seeshing Yeung
  • , Rhonda G. Craven
  • , Marcus Hasselhorn

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    34 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    This study aims to develop a short German version of the Self Description Questionnaire (SDQ I-GS) in order to present a robust economical instrument for measuring German preadolescents' multidimensional self-concept. A full German version of the SDQ I (SDQ I-G) that maintained the original structure and thus length of the English original SDQ I instrument (Marsh, Herbert W. 1990b. Self Description Questionnaire - I (SDQ I). Manual. Macarthur, NSW, Australia: University of Western Sydney.) served as a basis for empirically deriving the SDQ I-GS. Using a sample of German students in grades 3-6 (N = 1958), the construct validity of the SDQ I-GS was tested by both a within-network approach using confirmatory factor analyses and a between-network approach examining the relations of self-concept to external validity criteria (academic achievement and self-concept factors of another instrument). Construct validity for both the full (SDQ I-G) and the short version (SDQ I-GS) was consistent. Hence, the SDQ I-GS was demonstrated as a shorter and yet psychometrically sound instrument for measuring the multiple facets of self-concept of German preadolescents. The production of an economical instrument may stimulate wider use of self-concept instruments to further advances in self-concept research and theory.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)415-438
    Number of pages24
    JournalInternational Journal of Research and Method in Education
    Volume36
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'A short German version of the Self Description Questionnaire I : theoretical and empirical comparability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this