The multimedia piers-harris children's self-concept scale 2: Its psychometric properties, equivalence with the paper-and-pencil version, and respondent preferences

Mon Hsin Wang Flahive, Ying Chih Chuang, Chien Mo Li

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A multimedia version of Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale 2 (Piers-Harris 2) was created with audio and cartoon animation to facilitate the measurement of self-concept among younger children. This study aimed to assess the psychometric qualities of the computer version of Piers-Harris 2 scores, examine its score equivalence with the paper-andpencil version, and survey the respondent preference of the two versions. Two hundred and forty eight Taiwanese students from the first to fourth grade were recruited. In regard to the psychometric properties, high internal consistency (α = .91) was found for the total score of multimedia Piers-Harris 2. High interscale correlations (.77 to .83) of the multimedia Piers-Harris 2 scores and the results of confirmatory factor analysis suggested the multimedia Piers-Harris 2 contained good structural characteristics. The scores of the multimedia Piers-Harris 2 also had significant correlations with the scores of the Elementary School Children's Self Concept Scale. The equality of convergence and criterion-related validities of Piers-Harris 2 scores for the multimedia and paper-and-pencil versions and the results of ICCs between the scores of the multimedia and paper-and-pencil Piers-Harris 2 suggested their high level of equivalence. Participants showed more positive attitudes towards the multimedia version.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0135386
JournalPLoS ONE
Volume10
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 7 2015

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The multimedia piers-harris children's self-concept scale 2: Its psychometric properties, equivalence with the paper-and-pencil version, and respondent preferences'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this