EÖTVÖS LORÁND UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND PSYCHOLOGY PSYCHOLOGY DOCTORAL SCHOOL
HEAD OF PSYCHOLOGY DOCTORAL SCHOOL: PROF. DR. ZSOLT DEMETROVICS
SOCIALISATION AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SOCIAL PROCESSES PROGRAMME HEAD OF PROGRAMME: PROF. DR. GYÖRGY HUNYADY
THESES OF DOCTORAL (PHD) DISSERTATION
ANITA NAGYNÉ HEGEDŰS
EXAMINATION OF SELF-EFFICACY AMONG STUDENTS WITH TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT AND INTELLECUTAL DISABILITY
SUPERVISOR: DR. HABIL. JÁNOS GYŐRI, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, ELTE CIPE
2017
2
The thesis focuses on exploring the characteristics of self-efficacy among children in early adolescence. The studies were conducted to explore the forming of self-efficacy beliefs of upper school students, and their relation with constructs they are likely to connect. The overall purpose of the research was to examine the relationships and linkages of self-efficacy with self-esteem, social support, class climate, social position and socio-demographic background factors. The explanation of focusing on self-efficacy is the fact that in this age group domain-specific assessment of self-efficacy is underrepresented in Hungary.
Introduction
Self-efficacy is a cognitive construct which plays an essential role in personality development (Rózsa and Kő, s.a.). It influences cognition, motivation, emotion and behaviour (Bandura, 1993, 1994, 1995), and it is an important component of human functioning (Ross, 2007). It shows that how individuals think about their abilities which determines their own everyday operation, effective functioning, and psychological well-being (Bandura, Pastorelli, Barbaranelli and Caprara, 1999; Rózsa and Kő, s.a.). Efficacy beliefs determine the forming the individuals’ life and personal development, especially by influencing which contexts they choose and which activities they are involved in (Bandura, 2001).
Self-efficacy is a perceived ability, opinion, decision, judgement about the individual’s own abilities whether he can perform a behaviour or fulfil a goal (Bandura, 1994, 1997, 2006, 2012; Schunk and Miller, 2002; Stajkovic and Luthans, 2002), it influences the areas of everyday functioning, for example learning, motivation, self-regulation and social relationships (Bandura, 2001; Bandura et al., 1996; Caprara et al., 2011; Rózsa and Kő, s.a.;
Schunk and DiBenedetto, 2016). The exercise of agency is the central mechanism of virtue (Bandura, 1986, 1989, 1997), and it can be best interpreted in social-cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986; Maddux and Gosslin, 2012).
There are four key sources of the development of self-efficacy beliefs according to the classical model. The first is the mastery experiences, previous personal achievement experiences (Bandura, 1977, 1994, 1995; Wood and Bandura, 1989). The second source is the vicarious information, experiences which can be obtained by observing others achieving success (by effort) (Bandura, 1994, 1997; Bandura and Adams, 1977). Social persuasion is the third one, which means convincing the individual about his abilities and capacity to make more effort and reaching success (Bandura, 1994, 1997, 2009; Wood and Bandura, 1989).
The fourth source is physiological and emotional states. The increased level of affective arousal can be an energising, facilitating or debilitating factor (Bandura, 1994, 1995; Schunk and Meece, 2006; Schunk and Pajares, 2004). The fifth, additional source is the imaginal experiences. How the individual imagines himself or others behaving effectively can be a strategy to increase self-efficacy (Maddux, 1995, 2002; Maddux and Lewis, 1995; Williams, 1995).
The self-efficacy beliefs control the human functioning through four processes (cognitive, motivational, affective and selective) mainly in combination with each other. The self-efficacy beliefs appear in the thinking patterns which direct the behaviour. The self- efficacy beliefs influences directly how much time the individual spend on the solution of the task which in turn reflects the level of motivation. The coping ability beliefs affect the degree of experienced stress in difficult situation which reflects the affective level. Due to the results of selection processes the individual forms different competences, interests, social network that influence his life course (Bandura, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997).
3
The self-efficacy experiences are based on the family. This environment gives the first experiences, the child gets the first feedbacks of its achievement in this scene (Bandura, 1994;
Schunk and Pajares, 2001, 2009). The families, especially the parents are considered to be the most important supporting system in a child’s life (Mohanraj and Latha, 2005). Family members and parents are powerful models (vicarious information) for children (Schunk and DiBenedetto, 2016; Schunk and Pajares, 2001). If the parental model shows coping with difficulties, reflects the importance of persistence and effort, the children’s self-efficacy will increase (Schunk and Meece, 2006; Schunk and Pajares, 2001, 2009). Certain family factors (e.g. independence, conflicts) play important part in the adolescents’ adaptation and academic achievement (Mohanraj and Latha, 2005).
Parental sensitivity, predictability and involvement are important components of children’s and adolescents’ socialization and well-being (Juang and Silbereisen, 1999).
Family support can be considered one of the best predictors of self-efficacy (Özdemir, 2009).
Parallel with the children’s development the social world expands. The peers get more and more important (Bandura, 1994; Schunk and Pajares, 2001; Wentzel, Russell and Baker, 2014) including in forming self-knowledge referring to abilities. Although the children compare themselves with their brothers or sisters at first (Bandura, 1994), with the development and the beginning of institutional education, the circle of social comparisons widens.
Children’s social self-efficacy includes the perceived ability to form and maintain social relationship, to cooperate with others and to solve conflicts (Bandura et al., 1999). Children consider their social position important, which determines their authority and popularity.
Because peers affect self-efficacy, children try to surround themselves with children of similar interests and values, and doing so they can develop their self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994).
Friends and relationships with the peers are central factors of the development of self-efficacy among adolescents (Ryan, 2000; Schunk and Meece, 2006; Schunk and Miller, 2002). Peers provide informative comparison possibilities to judge and check self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994).
In educational context, self-efficacy can be defined as an individual cognitive factor of perceived ability to learn or attain a certain degree of performance (Bandura, 1997, Schunk and Meece, 2006). Academic self-efficacy includes the perceived ability of fulfilling the requirements, ability beliefs of the direction of knowledge acquisition and acquisition of several subjects, fulfilling expectations (personal, parental and of teachers) concerning with school (Bandura et al., 1999). Self-efficacy has direct and indirect effects on the acquisition of skills, abilities, knowledge (Schunk, 1981, 1984; Zimmerman, 2000), and academic advance (Rózsa and Kő, s.a.).
The strong feeling of self-efficacy can actively take part in enhancing achievement, for example if the individual makes an effort to achieve his goal, he experiences the difficult tasks as a challenge to fulfil rather than a threatening situation to avoid (Bandura, 1994;
Weinberg et al., 1979). Students with high self-efficacy prefer difficult, challenging tasks which can be solved (Zimmerman, 2000), however, students who are doubtful about themselves and their abilities try to avoid tasks which seem to be difficult (Bandura, 1994;
Weinberg et al., 1979). To sum up e.g. the achievement of individuals with the same skills and abilities show heterogeneity. Depending on that whether their self-efficacy beliefs
4
strengthen or weaken their motivation, effort, and persistence, they achieve low, average or high comparing to themselves (Wood and Bandura, 1989; Zimmerman, 1995)
The school climate ensures the social and affective development apart from enhancing academic achievement and success (Zulliget al, 2010). It is important to note that children who struggle with difficulties (including integration of students with mild intellectual disability) exceedingly suffer or may suffer from social comparison, especially in classes where the proper differentiation of the curriculum is missing, and the teachers often give comparative evaluations. The students evaluate themselves according to high requirements in these communities (Bandura, 1994; Schunk and Meece, 2006; Schunk and Pajares, 2009).
Based on the above, it can be clearly justified, that self-efficacy is a very important factor not only in adults’ but also in children’s life. Its importance can be interpreted especially from the early adolescence due to educational specialities. Senior class students took part in my research. My aim was to examine the self-efficacy of this population, and explore the background factors (personal, family, and social) from psychological aspect, which influence this area. I assessed self-efficacy as domain specific construct in accordance with Bandura’s concept. I set up a model based on the examined population, which has the variable of self-efficacy in the centre.
Due to several factors, it was reasonable to take children with mild intellectual disability in the data collection besides students with typical development. On one hand, according to the available literature, the study of self-efficacy in this population is internationally underrepresented. On the other hand, the analysis of statistical data shows that the majority institutions are ensuring more and more possibilities for education of children with special educational needs among them children with mild intellectual disability (Kőpatakiné Mészáros, 2011; Papp, Perlusz, Schiffer, Szekeres, Takács, 2012). Parallel with the grown role of education in integrated form (Kőpatakiné Mészáros, 2011; Papp, 2008), questions have rightly arisen concerning the development, possibilities of educating children in segregated form, and its advantages and disadvantages.
Both family, peer factors, and institutional educational factors play a role in the formation of self-knowledge. One of the most important tasks of socialization is to form a realistic self-knowledge and self-concept not only in case of individuals with typical development, but also ones who struggle with difficulties or certain disabilities. The diverse development experienced in several domains among children with mild intellectual disability probably concerns self-efficacy and its probable related domains which are parts of the present research. My studies were constructed to enable me to reflect the practical questions emerging in the research of self-efficacy.
5
The Construction of the Research
My thesis presents three empirical studies, of which data collections were performed in the primary schools of Csongrád County.
Before the application of the research questionnaires pilot studies were implemented.
Conceptual and grammatical changes were made in the self-efficacy, self-esteem, and social support scale to help better understanding, and application which suits the age and developmental speciality of the examined population.
In the first study, the responses of majority primary schools and senior class students with typical development were collected. By the analysis of the data you can get a general view of the formation and patterns of self-efficacy of students with typical development, and its relationship with several factors such as self-esteem, social support, class climate, sociometry and sociodemographic background factors.
The second study was based on the responses of students with mild intellectual disability (diagnosis code based on the expert opinion: BNO F70). The sample consisted of senior class students who has taken part in the given educational form (integrated or segregated) for minimum one year. The results of the data collection show the formation and patterns of self-efficacy of students with mild intellectual disability, and how it is related to self-esteem, social support, class climate, sociometry and sociodemographic background factors.
The differences of the results of the first and second study reflect the diverse organisation and characteristics of the self-efficacy of the two populations, while the correspondences show joint points, inform similarly organised domains, which are probably independent from the intellectual level.
The third study was performed in joint sampling scheme, the results were assessed by drawing three sub-samples in. I joined the senior class students with mild intellectual disability who study in integrated form with classmates with typical development, and with students with mild intellectual disability who study in segregated form taking into consideration the biggest correspondence according to the subsequent criteria: sex, age, grade, family structure, number of brothers and sisters, birth order. In the joint of students with mild intellectual disability I took the intelligence quotient into account, as well, I worked with a maximum +5 difference. For it I based my assessment on the results of such intelligence tests which have accepted scales in the current psychodiagnostic practice (WISC-IV Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – fourth edition, and the Hungarian version of Woodcock- Johnson Cognitive Abilities Test). The further conditions of getting into the sample were the same as in the second study. This study gives important results about the formation of self- efficacy of students with mild intellectual disability who learn in integrated and segregated formsand the effects of the educational form on the characteristics of self-efficacy.
6
Measures
I assessed self-efficacy with a 56-item scale, which was based on the Hungarian 50-item (9 domain, 3 factors) version of Bandura’s Multidimensional Scales of Perceived Self- Efficacy (MSPSE, 1990) by Sándor Rózsa and Natasa Kő (manuscript, s.a.).
Self-esteem was measured with 14 items, which were chosen after having studied the Hungarian versions of Rosenberg’s (1965) classical self-esteem scale and the items used in international researches (e.g. Kiss, 2009; Kökönyei and et al., 2012; Sallay, Martos, Földvári, Szabó and Ittzés, 2014; Wylie, 1989).
Measures of Perceived Social Support (MPSS, Turner and Marino, 1994) by Bettina Pikó (2002) were used to examine the subjective satisfaction with social support.
From the phenomenon scope of class climate, I focused on the learning of the students’
opinions about the class community; the assessment was performed with five items. Two items were chosen from HBSC (Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children; Zsíros and Várnai, 2014) research, and the other three were formed according to international literature which deal with this area (e.g. Dwyer et al, 2004; Freiberg, 1999; Holfve-Sabel, 2006).
Multi-relational sociometry was taken in the research (Mérei, 2004). 12 sociometric questions were used altogether in the studies. After the sociometric questions the students were asked about the profession they would choose when they were adults.
The parental questionnaire consisted of demographic questions, and questions referring to family structure, and school education, satisfaction, further study, and all the parents whose child took part in the research were asked to fill in the questionnaire.
Administration of the Questionnaires
Before the administration of the questionnaires the necessary permissions were acquired (Klebersberg Institution Maintenance Centre, directors of KLIK educational district centre, director generals, school directors, parents, students).
The administration of student questionnaires was executed in two ways. The assessment of class climate and sociometry was performed on class level, and the question about the professional aspired profession was also included in this survey. The administration of self- efficacy, self-esteem and social support was performed in small groups in the first study, and individually in the second and third study.
7
Measurement of the self-efficacy of the students with typical development (Study 1)
Sample
Senior class students with typical development from primary schools of Csongrád County took part in the study. The data collection was executed from school year 2013/2014 second term to school year 2016/2017 second term. The data of 430 students altogether could be used in the analysis. 201 boys (46,7%) and 229 girls (53,3%) took part, of whom 125 (29,1%) were 5th grade, 113 (26,3%) were 6th grade, 99 (23,0%) were 7th grade and 93 (21,6%) were 8th grade students. The mean age is 12,33 years (SD: 1,33 year), the GPA is 4,06 (SD: ,7).
The hypotheses of the study
Eight hypotheses were formulated focusing on the general aim of the study, and the last two (Hypothesis 8 and 9) are related to the research model (Table 1.).
Hypothesis 1 The psychometric characteristics of Self-Efficacy Scale used in the present study will be the same as the characteristics of the scale validated by Sándor Rózsa and Natasa Kő (s.a.), so the items can be rated in 9 sub-domains and 3 factors with appropriate reliability.
Hypothesis 2 Self-esteem and self-efficacy is related, higher level of the self-efficacy corresponds with higher level of the self-esteem (Di Giunta et al., 2013; Phan and Ngu, 2014;
Zuffiano et al., 2012).
Hypothesis 3 Higher social support promotes more positive judgement of self-efficacy, so the higher value is associated to the items of social support, the higher the mean of self- efficacy is (Fertman and Primack, 2009; Ryan, 2000; Schunk and Meece, 2006;
Schunk and Miller, 2002).
Hypothesis 4 The perception of the class climate influences self-efficacy. The more positive the perception of the class climate is, the more favourably the student judges his efficacy in the measured domains (Fejes, 2012; Saki, Fallah, Mahmoodabadi and Karimi, 2014; Tosto, Asbury, Mazzocco, Petrill and Kovas, 2016; Zedan and Bitar, 2014).
Hypothesis 5 The social position influences the formation of the student’s self-efficacy. The better the student’s position is in the class, the more positively he judges his self- efficacy (Bandura, 1994; Ryan, 2000; Schunk and Meece, 2006; Schunk and Miller, 2002).
Hypothesis 6 The sex influences the formation of the self-efficacy beliefs (Britner and Pajares, 2001; Pajares, 2007; Rózsa and Kő, s.a.).
Hypothesis 7 The age influences the formation of the self-efficacy beliefs. The self-efficacy scores shows descending tendency as the students become older (Jain and Dowson, 2009; Juang and Silbereisen, 1999; Rózsa and Kő, s.a.; Urdan and Midgley, 2003).
Hypothesis 8 The mediating variables (self-esteem, social support, class climate, social position) transmit the effects of the determinants, they strengthen the effects of the family background factors, the subjective and objective factors of institutional education, sex, and age on self-efficacy.
Hypothesis 9 The sex, the age and the sociodemographic factors have direct effects on self- efficacy.
Table 1. The main hypotheses of the study
8 Results
The measures of the research have appropriate psychometric characteristics after the modification due to the experiences of the pilot study (Table 2). It should be highlighted that the adaptation of the measure was not intended in the study, but the most important and as good as possible modifications were implemented concerning the empirical evidences, bearing in mind the reliability of the results.
Measures Number of
items
Cronbach- alpha
Item rest correlation
Self-Efficacy Scale 52 ,934 ,276-,686
Self-Esteem Scale 12 ,892 ,455-,682
Social Support Satisfaction Scale
Parental Social Support 12 ,918 ,540-,754
Social Support from Friends 6 ,874 ,624-,742
Class Climate 5 ,812 ,523-,661
Sociometry
Positive nomination 6 ,889 ,539-,817
Negative nomination 4 ,792 ,535-,655
Table 2. The internal consistency of the research measures
Regarding the research focus, hypothesis about the psychometric characteristics of Self- Efficacy Scale was set up only. Sándor Rózsa and Natasa Kő (s.a.) proved that the items could be ranked in 9 sub-domains and 3 factors with appropriate reliability. The items of the 9 sub- domains of the modified self-efficacy scale used in the study have appropriate Cronbach- alpha and item rest correlation values. The internal consistency of the total 52-item self- efficacy scale is excellent (Cronbach-alpha: ,934). The exploratory factor analysis of the subscales (Principal Component Analysis, Varimax rotation) proves the three-factor model (the three factors explain 69,7 % of the total variance: 26,7; 24,0; 19,0). It should be noted that comparing with the results of previous research on the sample of national population (Rózsa and Kő, s.a.), the content of the factors got restructured, as well.
Correlational analysis was performed to test the relationship of the variables that are based on the scales used in the data collection in relation with self-efficacy. The results are presented according to the hypotheses of the study (Table 3.).
Self-efficacy (total) Pearson
correlation
Significance level
Self-esteem r=,504 p<,01
Social support from friends r=,453 p<,01
Parental social support r=,440 p<,01
Social support from the mother r=,410 p<,01 Social support from the father r=,337 p<,01
Class climate r=,405 p<,01
Positive nomination in sociometry r=,116 p<,05 Negative nomination in sociometry r=-,150 p<,01
Table 3. The results of the correlational analysis of total self-efficacy and the variables of the study
9
The fulfilment of the hypotheses is shown in Table 4, but the hypothesis about the relationship between social support and self-efficacy (Hypothesis 3) should be highlighted, which has two sub-hypotheses. The main hypothesis (positive correlation between social support and self-efficacy) and the first sub-hypothesis (social support from the mother is in a stronger relationship with self-efficacy than social support from the father) were proven. The second sub-hypothesis (the parental social support has stronger influence on self-efficacy than social support from friends) was not proven, so in all Hypothesis 3 was just partly proven.
The results of the analyses concerning the relationship between the sex and self-efficacy show that the girls have higher self-efficacy beliefs than the boys in the case of total self- efficacy and several subscales (Hypothesis 6). It was presumed that self-efficacy shows descending tendency as the students get older (Rózsa and Kő, s.a.). The post hoc analysis of the significant results prove that the youngest students have the highest, while the oldest ones have the lowest self-efficacy evaluations, however, the descending tendency from the younger to the older could not be proven (Hypothesis 7).
After the analysis of the relationships, linear regression and path analysis was performed to test the model which had been set up based on the literature and the results of the correlations. The main goal was to reveal the main directions of the effects taking in account that the influence between the variables is probably mutual, back-and-forth.
At first the presumed relationships were tested by linear regression, then path analysis was performed to check the effects between the variables with IBM SPSS Amos 24 program.
The fit indices of the final model are good (χ2:62,90; CMIN/DF: 2,10; CFI: ,96; RMSEA:
,050), so the model can be accepted (Figure 1).
Figure 1. The path analysis of the research model
The path analysis confirmed the results of the linear regression. According to the model, self-esteem and social support from friends have the highest effect on self-efficacy. Parental social support and class climate have weaker but direct effect, while the variable of positive nominations has only indirect effect on self-efficacy. It imposes its effect through class climate or social support from friends directly, or by class climate through social support from friends. Among the determinants just the GPA has a direct effect on self-efficacy; its
10
influence follows the effect size of the two previous mediators. The other determinants (except one) have only indirect effect through mediator variables on self-efficacy.
Qualification expected by parents can impose its effect through determinants, it has the strongest relationship with the GPA. The path analysis proved the relationship of the self- esteem with the other mediators referring to its more overall, trait characteristic.
To sum up, I succeeded to prove one possible version of relationships by the model, and by setting it up I wanted to treat self-efficacy as a goal variable.
The hypotheses of Study 1 can be found in Table 4.
H1 The psychometric characteristics of Self-Efficacy Scale used in the present study will be the same as the characteristics of the scale validated by Sándor Rózsa and Natasa Kő (s.a.), so the items can be rated in 9 sub-domains and 3 factors with appropriate reliability.
Proven
H2 Self-esteem and self-efficacy is related, higher level of the self-efficacy corresponds with higher level of the self-esteem.
Proven H3 Higher social support promotes more positive judgement of self-efficacy, so
the higher value is associated to the items of social support, the higher the mean of self-efficacy is.
Partly proven H4 The perception of the class climate influences self-efficacy. The more
positive the perception of the class climate is, the more favourably the student judges his efficacy in the measured domains.
Proven
H5 The social position influences the formation of the student’s self-efficacy.
The better the student’s position is in the class, the more positively he judges his self-efficacy.
Proven
H6 The sex influences the formation of the self-efficacy beliefs. Proven H7 The age influences the formation of the self-efficacy beliefs. The self-
efficacy scores shows descending tendency as the students become older.
Not proven H8 The mediating variables (self-esteem, social support, class climate, social
position) transmit the effects of the determinants, they strengthen the effects of the family background factors, the subjective and objective factors of institutional education, sex, and age on self-efficacy.
Partly proven
H9 The sex, the age and the sociodemographic factors have direct effects on self-efficacy.
Partly proven Table 4. The results of the hypothesis test
11
Assessment of the Self-Efficacy of Students with Mild Intellectual Disability (Study 2)
Sample
Senior class students with mild intellectual disability from primary schools of Csongrád County took part in the study. The data collection was executed from school year 2013/2014 second term to school year 2016/2017 second term. The data of 106 students altogether could be used in the analysis. 57 boys (53,8%) and 49 girls (46,2%) took part, of whom 22 (20,8%) were 5th grade, 30 (28,3%) were 6th grade, 26 (24,5%) were7th grade and 28 (26,4%) were 8th grade students. The mean age is 13,78 years (SD: 1,29 year), the GPA is 3,74 (SD: ,78).
The hypotheses of the study
The hypotheses of the study of the self-efficacy of students with mild intellectual disability were formulated according to the hypotheses of Study 1 (Table 1), of which reason is that this field has not been worked out yet.
In the analysis of the data I would also like to test the research model set up in Study 1 in this population.
Results
Correlational analysis was performed to test the relationship of the variables that are based on the scales used in the data collection in relation with self-efficacy in this case, as well. The results are presented according to the hypotheses of the study (Table 5).
Self-efficacy (total) Pearson
correlation
Significance level
Self-esteem r=,324 p<,01
Social support from friends r=,501 p<,01
Parental social support r=,430 p<,01
Social support from the mother r=,277 p<,01 Social support from the father r=,381 p<,01
Table 5. The results of the correlational analysis of total self-efficacy and the variables of the study
The correlations of class climate, the variables formed in the sociometrical analyses and the total self-efficacy were not significant.
12
The results of the hypothesis test of Study 2 can be found in Table 6.
H1 Self-esteem and self-efficacy is related, the level of self-efficacy corresponds with the level of self-esteem.
Proven H2 Higher social support promotes more positive judgement of self-efficacy,
so the higher value is associated to the items of social support, the higher the mean of self-efficacy is
Partly proven H3 The perception of the class climate influences self-efficacy. The more
positive the perception of the class climate is, the more favourably the student judges his efficacy in the measured domains.
Not proven H4 The social position influences the formation of the student’s self-efficacy.
The better the student’s position is in the class, the more positively he judges his self-efficacy.
Partly proven H5 The sex influences the formation of the self-efficacy beliefs. Not
proven H6 The age influences the formation of the self-efficacy beliefs. The total sum
of the self-efficacy scores shows descending tendency as the students become older.
Not proven H7 The mediating variables (self-esteem, social support, class climate, social
position) transmit the effects of the determinants, they strengthen the effects of the family background factors, the subjective and objective factors of institutional education, sex, and age on self-efficacy.
Partly proven
H8 The sex, the age and the sociodemographic factors have direct effects on self-efficacy.
Partly proven Table 6. The results of the hypothesis test
The hypothesis about the relationship between social support and self-efficacy (Hypothesis 2) should be highlighted, because the results of its sub-hypothesis tests are necessary to understand the level of the fulfilment of the hypothesis. The main hypothesis (the positive correlation between social support and self-efficacy) was proven. The first sub- hypothesis (social support from the mother is in a stronger relationship with self-efficacy than social support from the father) and the second (parental social support has higher effect on total self-efficacy than social support from friend) were not proven, so in all Hypothesis 2 was just partly proven.
Hypothesis 4 referred to the relationship between the individual’s social position and his self-efficacy. There was no significant relationship between the total self-efficacy and the variables formed in the sociometrical analyses, but some subscales of self-efficacy show significant relationship, which points to the relevance of my presumption. However, the low scores and the weak correlations prove the hypothesis just partly.
The rejection of the hypothesis about the correlation of the sex and self-efficacy (Hypothesis 5) was due to the non-significant results concerning both the total self-efficacy and the subscales.
The presumption that the total sum of the self-efficacy scores shows descending tendency as the students become older (Hypothesis 6) could not be proved even though in spite of the statistically relevant results which came up in the analysis.
Besides testing the hypotheses, my aim was to test the model in this population which was set up in Study 1. For the test IBM SPSS Amos 24 program was used. During the checking the whole model, some changes were necessary to be done with promising model fit indices. The appropriate model fit was reached by modification performed in several steps in
13
the population of students with mild intellectual disability (Figure 2.). The Model fit indices are good (χ2: 49,73; CMIN/DF: 1,28; PCFI: ,53; RMSEA: ,050), so the model can be accepted.
Figure 2: The model based on the population of students with mild intellectual disability.
According to the model which was set up on this population, among the mediators social support from friends has the highest influence followed by parental social support. Self- esteem has a weak but direct effect. Its indirect effect through social support from friends and parental social support is stronger than the direct one. The variables of class climate and positive nominations have indirect effect on self-efficacy. Regarding their directions, the variable of the sociometric questions influences class climate, which impose its effect through social support from friends.
Among the determinants just the GPA has a direct effect on self-efficacy; its effect size is a little bigger than the one of parental social support. The other determinants (except two) have only indirect effects on self-efficacy through the mediator variables. Qualification expected by parents and age can impose its effect through determinants, both by the mediation of the GPA. Although the model based on the population of students with typical development has stronger effects, this model also proved the relationship of the self-esteem with the other mediators referring to its more overall, trait characteristic.
14
Comparative Study of Students with Typical Development and Students of mild Intellectual disability (Study 3)
Sample
Senior class students with typical development and students with mild intellectual disability from primary schools of Csongrád County took part in the study. The data collection was executed from school year 2013/2014 second term to school year 2016/2017 second term. The data of 126 studentsaltogether could be used in the analysis:
- 42 students with mild intellectual disability who learn in integrated form,
- 42 students with mild intellectual disability who learn in segregated form (fit to the students with mild intellectual disability who learn in integrated form),
- 42 students with typical development (fit to a classmate with mild intellectual disability that learns in integrated form).
75 boys (59,5%) and 51 girls (40,5%) took part, of whom 27 (21,4%) were 5th grade, 30 (23,8%) were 6th grade, 35 (27,8%) were7th grade and 34 (27,0%) were 8th grade students.
The mean age is 13,33 years (SD: 1,28 year).
The hypotheses of the study
6 main hypotheses were formulated focusing on the goal of the study (Table 7.).
H1 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between the groups in the aspect of sex.
H2 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between the groups in the aspect of age.
H3 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between the groups in the aspect of family background factors.
H4 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between the groups in the aspect of the subjective variables of school education.
H5 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between the groups in the aspect of objective variables of school education.
H6 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between the groups in the aspect of desired qualification.
Table 7. The main hypotheses of the study
Results
Focusing on the hypotheses listed above, I analysed the domains covered by self- efficacy and the total self-efficacy scores in relation with the background factors. The three research groups were compared by variance analysis (One-Way ANOVA). The analyses were mainly exploratory, that can be explained with the low rate of the national studies about the self-efficacy of students of this age and national studies about students with mild intellectual disability in this field.
The analyses gave statistically relevant results in every subscale and in the total self- efficacy. Among the background factors – in this analysis –, sex, age, family structure,
15
number of persons by household, number of children per family, place in the birth order, perceived social position, the highest qualification expected by parents and by the students themselves, the highest qualification of the father had the highest effect on the results.
Overall, it can be appointed based on the results that the subsample of students with mild intellectual disability who learn in segregated form had significantly lower values than the other two groups. There is only one domain in which they show higher values, that is meeting the requirements.
The hypotheses of Study 3 can be seen in Table 8.
H1 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between the groups in the aspect of sex.
Partly proven H2 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between
the groups in the aspect of age.
Proven H3 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between
the groups in the aspect of family background factors.
Partly proven H4 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between
the groups in the aspect of the subjective variables of school education.
Not proven H5 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between
the groups in the aspect of objective variables of school education.
Partly proven H6 There are statistically significant differences in self-efficacy between
the groups in the aspect of desired qualification.
Proven
Table 8. The results of hypothesis test
Conclusion
The main goal of my research was to explore the self-efficacy of senior class students in several aspects, of which importance is supported by the low rate of the national studies of this domain. The research consisted of three studies. Study 1 and 2 used the same research construction on different populations of senior class students (students with typical development and with mild intellectual disability). In Study 3 I worked with fit sample, and by the analysis I intended to explore and get to know the self-efficacy features of the three main groups.
One of the most important results of Study 1 was the tested model of self-efficacy, which shows a possible relationship between the variables influencing self-efficacy. Another result should be highlighted from the research results, that is the successful fit of the model on the population of students with mild intellectual disability, which means that there is an identical conceptual frame to explore the self-efficacy features of the two populations. That the students who learn in integrated or segregated form can be compared due to the fit sample is a relevant outcome of Study 3 of which results were probably influenced by the educational form. The research results can help experts dealing with children to understand certain phenomena and characteristics, and they can use them in the development of children and students basing on the distinct strength.
16
Literature
Bandura, A. (1977): Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change.
Psychological Review, Vol. 84, No. 2, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986): Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1989): Human Agency in Social Cognitive Theory. American Psychologist, Vol.
44, No. 9, 1175-1184.
Bandura, A. (1990): Multidimensional scales of perceived self-efficacy. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Bandura, A. (1993): Perceived Self-efficacy in Cognitive Development and Functioning.
Educational Psychologist, 28 (2), 117-148.
Bandura, A. (1994): Self-efficacy. In: Ramachaudran, V. S. (Ed): Encyclopedia of human behavior, Vol. 4, Academic Press, New York, 71-81.
Bandura, A. (1995): Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In:
Bandura, A. (ed.): Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Bandura, A. (1997): Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman, New York.
Bandura, A. (2001): Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 52, 1-26.
Bandura, A. (2006a): Adolescent development from an agentic perspective. In: Pajares, F.;
Urdan, T. (eds.): Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT, 1-43.
Bandura, A. (2006b): Guide to the construction of self-efficacy scales. In Pajares, F.; Urdan, T. (eds): Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT, 307-337.
Bandura, A. (2012): On the Functional Properties of Perceived Self-Efficacy Revisited.
Journal of Management, Vol. 38 No. 1, 9-44.
Bandura, A.; Adams, N. E. (1977): Analysis of Self-Efficacy Theory of Behavioral Change.
Cognitive Therapy and Research, vol. 1, No. 4., 287-310.
Bandura, A.; Barbaranelli, C.; Caprara, G. V.; Pastorelli, C. (1996): Multifaceted Impact of Self-Efficacy Beliefs on Academic Functioning. Child Development, Vol.67. No.3, 1206-1222.
Bandura, A.; Pastorelli, C.; Barbanelli, C.; Caprara, G. V. (1999): Self-Efficacy Pathways to Childhood Depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 76. No. 2, 258-269.
Britner, S. L.; Pajares, F. (2001): Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 271- 285.
17
Caprara, G. V.; Vecchione, M.; Alessandri, G.; Gerbino, M.; Barbaranelli, C. (2011): The contribution of personality traits and self-efficacy beliefs to academic achievement: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 78–96.
Di Giunta, L.; Alessandri, G.; Gerbino, M.; Kanacri, P. L.; Zuffiano, A.; Caprara, G. V.
(2013): The determinants of scholastic achievement: The contribution of personality traits, self-esteem, and academic self-efficacy. Learning and Individual Differences, 27, 102–108.
Dwyer, K. K.; Bingham, S. G.; Carlson, R. E.; Prisbell, M.; Cruz, A. M.; Fus, D. A. (2004):
Communication and Connectedness in the Classroom: Development of the Connected Classroom Climate Inventory. Communication Reseach Reports, Vol. 21, Issue 3, 264- 272.
Fejes József Balázs (2012): A célorientációk és az osztálytermi környezet összefüggése a matematika tantárgyhoz kötődően 5-8. évfolyamon. PhD értekezés. Oktatáselmélet doktori program, Szeged.
Fertman, C. I.; Primack, B. A. (2009): Elementary Student Self-Efficacy Scale Development and Validation Focused on Student Learning, Peer Relations, and Resisting Drog Use.
J. Drug Education, Vol. 39(1), 23-38.
Freiberg, H. J. (1999, ed): School Climate: Measuring, Improving, and Sustaining Healthy Learning Environments. Routledge Falmer, London.
Holfve-Sabel, M-A. (2006): Attitudes towards Sweedish comprehensive school. Comparisons over time and between classrooms in grade 6. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences 242, Göteborg, Sweden.
Jain, S.; Dowson, M. (2009): Mathematics anxiety as a function of multidimensional self- regulation and self-efficacy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 240–249.
Juang, L. P.; Silbereisen, R. K. (1999): Supportive parenting and adolescent adjustment across time in former East and West Germany. Journal of Adolescence, 22,719-736.
Kiss Paszkál (2009): Önértékelés, elégedettség, identitás személyes és társadalmi vetületei. In:
Kiss Paszkál (szerk.): Emberi kapcsolatok és társadalmi nézetek kérdőív skáláinak megbízhatósági és érvényességi vizsgálata. Budapest, Eötvös Kiadó
Kökönyei Gyöngyi, Urbán Róbert, Örkényi Ágota, Költő András, Zsíros Emese, Kertész Krisztián, Németh Ágnes, Demetrovics Zsolt (2012): Z Generáció – MeGeneráció? A tudomány emberi arca: A Magyar Pszichológiai Társaság XXI. Országos Tudományos Nagygyűlése, Szombathely.
Kőpatakiné Mészáros Mária (2011): Kép a tükörben. Sajátos nevelési igényű tanulók az általános iskolában. In: Mayer, J.; Kőpatakiné, M. M. (szerk.): A szavak és a tettek.
Sajátos nevelési igényű tanulók a közoktatásban a 21. század első évtizedében Magyarországon. Oktatáskutató és Fejlesztő Intézet, Budapest.
Maddux, J. E.; Lewis, J. (1995): Self-efficacy and adjustment. In: Maddux, J. E. (Ed): Self- efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application. Plenum, New York, 37-68.
Maddux, J. E. (1995): Self-efficacy theory. In: Maddux, J. E. (Ed): Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application. Plenum, New York, 3-33.
18
Maddux, J. E. (2002): Self-Efficacy: The Power of Believing You Can. In: Snyder, C. R.;
Lopez, S. J. (Eds): Handbook of Positive Psychology. Oxford University Press, New York.
Maddux, J.E.; Gosslin, J.T. (2012): Self-Efficacy. In: Leary, M. R.; Tangney, J. P. (Eds):
Handbook of Self and Identity, Second Edition, Guilford Press.
Mérei Ferenc (2004): Közösségek rejtett hálózata. Osiris, Budapest.
Mohanraj, R.; Latha (2005): Perceived family environment in relation to adjustment and academic achievement. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 31, 18- 23.
Özdemir, M. (2009): Adolescent Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Multiple Contexts. An Analysis of Individual, Peer, Family, and Neighborhood Factors. VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, Saarbrücken.
Pajares, F. (2007): Empirical properties of a scale to assess writing self-efficacy in school contexts. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, vol. 39, no. 4.
Papp Gabriella (2008): Az enyhén értelmi fogyatékos gyermekek integrált oktatása, nevelése hazánkban. In: Szabó Ákosné (szerk.): Tanulmányok a tanulásban akadályozottak pedagógiája és határtudományai köréből. Educatio Társadalmi Szolgáltató Közhasznú Társaság Budapest.
Papp Gabriella; Perlusz, Andrea; Schiffer, Csilla; Szekeres, Ágota; Takács István (2012): Két út van előttem…? Speciális és többségi intézmények közötti kooperáció és konkurencia a sajátos nevelési igényű tanulók oktatásában. Gyógypedagógiai Szemle, 2012/2., 170- 187.
Phan, H. P.; Ngu, B. H. (2014): Interrelations between Self-esteem and Personal Self-efficacy in Educational Contexts: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(3): 108-120.
Pikó Bettina (2002): Fiatalok pszichoszociális egészsége és rizikómagatartása a társas támogatás tükrében. Osiris, Budapest.
Ross, S. N. (2007): Albert Bandura. In: Kincheloe, J. L.; Horn, R. A. (ED.): The Praeger handbook of Education and Psychology (vol. 1.). Praeger Publishers, Westport, Connecticut, London.
Rózsa Sándor; Kő Natasa (é.n.): Az észlelt énhatékonyság szerepe gyermek- és serdülőkorban.
Kézirat.
Rózsa Sándor, V. Komlósi Annamária (2014): A Rosenberg Önbecsülés Skála pszichometriai jellemzői: a pozitívan és negatívan megfogalmazott tételek működésének sajátosságai.
Pszichológia, 34, 2, 149–174.
Ryan, A. (2000): Peer groups as a context for the socialization of adolescents’ motivation, engagement, and achievement in school. Educational Psychologist, 35, 101-111.
Saki, S. S.; Fallah, M. H.; Mahmoodabadi, H. Z.; Karimi, R. (2014): The Comparative Analysis of Mathematical Achievement, Self-Efficacy, and Self-Concept Based on the Perceived Classroom Climate Among Male and Female Students. International Journal of School Health, 1(3).
Sallay Viola; Martos Tamás; Földvári Mónika; Szabó Tünde; Ittzés, András (2014): A Rosenberg Önértékelés Skála (RSES-H): alternatív fordítás, strukturális invariancia és validitás. Mentálhigiéné és Pszichoszomatika, 15 (3), 259-275.
19
Schunk, D. H. (1981): Modeling and Attributional Effects on Children’s Achievement: A Self-Efficacy Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 93-105.
Schunk, D. H. (1984): Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational Psychologist, 19, 48-58.
Schunk, D. H.; DiBenedetto, M. K. (2016): Self-Efficacy Theory in Education. Wentzel, K.
R.; Miele, D. B. (eds.): Handbook of Motivation at School. Second Edition. Routledge, New York and London.
Schunk, D. H.; Meece, J. L. (2006): Self-Efficacy Development in Adolescences. In: Pajares, F.; Urdan, T. (Eds.): Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT, 71-96.
Schunk, D. H.,; Miller, S. D. (2002): Self-efficacy and adolescents’ motivation. In: Pajares, F.; Urdan, T. (Eds.): Academic motivation of adolescents. Greenwich, CT: Information Age, 29-52.
Schunk, D. H.; Pajares, F. (2001): The Development of Academic Self-Efficacy. In Wigfield, A.; Eccles, J. (Eds.): Development of achievement motivation. Academic Press, San Diego.
Schunk, D. H.; Pajares, F. (2004): Self-efficacy in education revisited. Empirical and Applied Evidence. In: McInnerney, D. M.; Van Etten, S. (Eds): Big theories revisited.
Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, Connecticut.
Schunk, D. H.; Pajares, F. (2009): Self-efficacy theory. Wenzel, K. R.; Wigfield, A. (Eds):
Handbook of motivation at school. New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 35-53.
Stajkovic, A. D.; Luthans, F. (2002):Social Cognitive Theory and Self-efficacy: Implications for Motivation Theory and Practice. In: Steers, R. M.; Porter, L. W.; Bigley, G. A.
(Eds): Motivation and Work Behavior (7th ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, 126-140.
Tosto, M. G.; Asbury, K.; Mazzocco, M. M. M.; Petrill, S. A.; Kovas, Y. (2016): From classroom environment to mathematics achievement: The mediating role of self- perceived ability and subject interest. Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 50, 260–269.
Turner, R. J.; Marino, F. (1994): Social support and social structure. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35. 3. sz. 193–212.
Urdan, T.; Midgley, C. (2003): Changes in the perceived classroom goal structure and pattern of adaptive learning during early adolescence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 524-551.
Weinberg, R.; Gould, D.; Jackson, A. (1979): Expectations and Performance: An Empirical Test of Bandura’s Self-efficacy Theory. Journal of Sport Psychology, 1, 320-331.
Wentzel, K. R.; Russell, S. L.; Baker, S. (2014): Peer relationships and positive adjustment at school. In: Furlong, M. J.; Gilman, R.; Huebner, E. S. (Eds): Handbook of positive psychology in schools, Routledge, New York, 260-277.
Williams, S. L. (1995): Self-efficacy, anxiety, and phobic disorders. In: Maddux, J. E. (Ed):
Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research and application. Plenum, New York, 69-107.
Wood, R.; Bandura, A. (1989): Social Cognitive Theory of Organizational Management.
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 3., 361-384.
20
Wylie, R. C. (1989): Measures of Self-Concept. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln and London.
Zedan, R.; Bitar, J. (2014): Environment Learning as a Predictor of Mathematics Self - Efficacy and Math Achievement. American International Journal of Social Science, Vol. 3, No. 6, 85-97.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995): Self-efficacy and educational development. In: Bandura, A. (Ed.):
Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000): Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82–91.
Zullig, K. J.; Koopman, T. M.; Patton, J. M.; Ubbes, V. A. (2010): School Climate: Historical Review, Instrument Development, and School Assessment. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28(2), 139–152.
Zuffiano, A.; Alessandri, G.; Gerbino, M.; Kanacri, B. P. L.; Di Giunta, L.; Milioni, M.;
Caprara, G. V. (2012): Academic achievement: The unique contribution of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning beyond intelligence, personality traits, and self-esteem.
Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 23, 158–162.
Zsíros Emese; Várnai Dóra (2014): Az iskola szerepe. In: Németh Ágnes és Költő András (szerk.): Egészség és egészségmagatartás iskoláskorban 2014. Az Iskoláskorú gyermekek egészségmagatartása elnevezésű, az Egészségügyi Világszervezettel együttműködésben megvalósuló nemzetközi kutatás 2014. évi felméréséről készült nemzeti jelentés; Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC): A WHO- collaborative Cross-National Study National Report 2014.
