Inventário de expectativas de resultados em usuários de crack (IERUC): construção e validação / The crack expectancy questionnaire (CEQ): construction and validation

Objetivos: Desenvolver e validar uma escala que avalie as expectativas de resultados em usuários de crack internados. Método: Estudo transversal, com amostra por conveniência. Inicialmente os itens do IERUC surgiram de frases de usuários divulgadas pela mídia e das falas de usuários de crack internados. Apareceram 41 frases, foram selecionadas 25 e submetidas a um grupo focal de 15 usuários de crack, os quais apontaram 18 frases. Um grupo de sete juízes especialistas em dependência química avaliou os 18 itens e aprovou 17, em cinco fatores teóricos. Resultados: Na validação semântica e psicométrica, o IERUC com 17 itens e cinco fatores foi aplicado em 170 homens internados, usuários de crack e após a análise fatorial a escala resultou 14 itens, distribuídos em quatro fatores, versão final apresentada neste estudo. Conclusões: Os resultados satisfatórios de validade e confiabilidade do IERUC definiram boas propriedades psicométricas, com base em um modelo de quatro fatores que avaliam as expectativas de resultados relacionadas ao uso de crack.

Aims: To develop and validate a scale to assess crack-related expectancies in hospitalized crack users. Method: This is a cross-sectional study with a convenience sample. The Crack Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ) items were initially developed from statements of crack users presented in the media and reports of hospitalized crack users. Of 41 statements collected, 25 were selected and subjected to a focus group of 15 crack users, who indicated 18 statements. A panel of seven drug dependence specialists evaluated the 18 items and approved 17 of them, divided into five theoretical factors. Results: For psychometric and semantic validation, the 17-item, five-factor CEQ was administered to 170 hospitalized male crack users. After factor analysis, the scale resulted in 14 items divided into four factors, with the final version presented in this study. Conclusions: Satisfactory results of CEQ validity and reliability defined good psychometric properties, based on a four-factor model to assess crack-related expectancies.

Validación de una nueva Escala de Expectativas de Resultados y Metas de Rendimiento para Matemática / Validity evidence for the new scales for mathematics outcome expectancies and performance goals

Con el objetivo de poder evaluar los postulados de un modelo de rendimiento académico en Matemática basado en la Teoría Social Cognitiva del Desarrollo de Carrera (SCCT - Lent, Brown & Hackett, 1994), se adaptaron las subescalas de Expectativas de resultados en Matemática y Metas en Matemática de la Escala de Autoeficacia para Enseñanza Media (Fouad, Smith & Enochs, 1997). En esta adaptación (Cupani & Gnavi, 2007)se observó que la Subescala Metas en Matemática presentó una estructura factorial simple y una adecuada confiabilidad, aunque no evidenció poder predictivo del rendimiento académico. Por otro lado, la Subescala Expectativas de Resultados presentó valores bajos de consistencia interna y se observó que el contenido de algunos de sus ítemes parece no ser aceptable para nuestro medio cultural. Por lo tanto, para mejorar ambas escalas se realizaron nuevos estudios. En una primera fase, se efectuaron dos grupos de enfoque con el propósito de generar nuevos ítemes sobre las Expectativas de resultados y Metas de rendimiento de los estudiantes de nuestro medio cultural. De este estudio se obtuvo una nueva versión de las escalas Expectativas de Resultados y Metas de Rendimiento compuestas por 13 y 11 ítemes, respectivamente. En una segunda fase se administraron estos nuevos ítemes a una muestra de 420 adolescentes con un rango de edad de 13 a 16 años (M = 13.84, DT = .76). Se realizaron estudios de análisis factorial (exploratorio y confirmatorio) y de confiabilidad mediante y de validez test-criterio. Los resultados demostraron que ambas escalas poseen adecuadas propiedades psicométricas.

Lent and Brown (2006) suggest guidelines for creating and adapting assessment tools based on the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT -Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). In the last years, this theory has been the subject of substantial research, both basic and theoretical. The authors indicate that any assessment of SCCT should: (a) contextualize measures to make sure they are grounded in a particular, domain-specific context, (b) be reasonably comprehensive in sampling the domain, designing multifaceted measures when the criterion is correspondingly complex, and (c) ensure compatibility between predictors and criteria along key dimensions, including content, context, temporal orientation, and level of specificity. Additionally, it is important to use reliable and valid tests. Without sound measures, it is difficult, if not impossible, to establish whether theory-discrepant findings are attributable to problems with the theory, flaws in operationalizing it, or both. In Argentina, Cupani and Gnavi (2007) assessed a model of academic performance in Mathematic, based on the SCCT. Cupani and Gnavi adapted the subscales for Mathematic Outcome Expectancies and Performance Goals of the Middle School Self-Efficacy Scale (Fouad, Smith, & Enochs, 1997). Results indicated that the goals subscale has a simple factor structure with adequate internal consistence, although it did not predict academic performance in Mathematic. Moreover, the Subscale for Mathematics Outcome Expectancies showed low internal consistence and some of its items did not transfer well to our cultural setting. Therefore, two follow-up studies were carried out to improve the psychometric properties of both scales. The first study employed two focus groups (n per group = 8) and aimed at generating ideas on the student's expectations of results and goals on academic achievement in our cultural setting. The information gathered was used to write 7 new items for the goals subscale and 12 items for the outcome expectancies. These items were then tested for clarity and understanding in a sample of adolescents. Language corrections were also carried out, yielding two new goals and outcome expectancies scales (11 and 13 items, respectively). On the second study, these scales were administered to a sample of 420 adolescents (M = 13.84; SD = .76). The internal structure of the scales was examined through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis and their internal consistency was analyzed by Cronbach's alpha. The predictive validity for Academic Achievement in Mathematic was also analyzed. The scale of logical-mathematical self- efficacy from the (revised) Self-efficacy Inventory of Multiple Intelligences (Pérez & Cupani, 2008) was also administered. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis revealed that a single-factor structure for the scale of performance goals (GFI: .92; CFI: .95, RMSEA: .08) and for the Scale for Mathematic Outcome Expectancies (GFI: .95; CFI: .96, RMSEA: .06) is the most appropriate model for the data gathered. Both scales had optimal Cronbach's alpha values (.86 and. 85, for performance goals and outcome expectancies, respectively). The study on predictive validity also showed that logic-mathematic self- efficacy beliefs and achievement goals in Mathematic explain 32% of variance of math school performance. The results show that Academic Achievement in Mathematic is partially explained by the model. In summary, both scales allow a contextualized measurement of outcome expectancies and performance goals on Mathematic in teenagers from our cultural area. These scales have satisfactory psychometric properties, presenting a clear internal structure, and adequate internal consistence. Future application of path analysis will allow a more precise identification of the interrelations between outcome expectancies and performance goals on Mathematic and their direct and indirect effects upon academic achievement in it.