Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 22, Issue 7, pp 595–612 | Cite as

The Psychometric Evaluation of a Three-Dimension Elementary Science Attitude Survey

  • Danhui Zhang
  • Todd Campbell


This study describes the development of an instrument to investigate elementary students attitudes toward science. As a result of the instrument development process employed, the finalized instrument consisted of 28-items separated into three dimensions. The instrument was found to exhibit acceptable ranges of internal consistency. Confirmatory Factor Analysis showed three factors that clustered into the three dimensions of attitude identified and concurrent validity was evidenced as correlations were found when comparing attitude measures with the instrument to students’ perceptions of their science classrooms. Based on the analyses completed, the instrument appears to be useful for assessing student attitude toward science.


Elementary science Student attitudes Instrumentation 


  1. Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2000). A cross-cultural study of classroom learning environments in Australia and Taiwan. Learning Environment Research: An International Journal, 3, 101–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alsop, S., & Watts, M. (2003). Science education and affect. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9),1043–1047.Google Scholar
  3. Baram-Tsabari, A., Sethi, R., Bry, L., & Yarden, A. (2006). Using questions sent to an Ask-A-Scientist site to identify children’s interests in science. Science Education, 90(6), 1050–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baram-Tsabari, A., & Yarden, A. (2009). Identifying meta-clusters of students’ interest in science and their change with age. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(9), 999–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blalock, C. L., Lichtenstein, M. J., & Owen, S. (2008). In Pursuit of validity: A comprehensive review of science attitude instruments 1935–2005. International Journal of Science Education, 30(7), 961–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Cronbach’s alpha. British Medical Journal, 314, 572.Google Scholar
  8. Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behaviour and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1191–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bronowski, J. (1973). The ascent of man. London: Warner Books.Google Scholar
  10. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 445–455). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Carey, N., & Shavelson, R. (1988). Outcomes, achievement, participation, and attitudes. In R. J. Shavelson, L. M. McDonnell, & J. Oakes (Eds.), Indicators for monitoring mathematics and science education (pp. 147–191). Los Angeles, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  12. Chen, S. (2002, June). The implementation of the IELC in elementary schools. Paper presented at the meeting of “The curriculum reformation in elementary and middle schools in China”, Beijing.Google Scholar
  13. Chen, M., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). Consequences of automatic evaluation: Immediate behavioral predispositions to approach or avoid stimulus. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(2), 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar
  15. Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  16. Fraser, B. J. (1978a). Development of a test of science-related attitudes. Science Education, 62(4), 509–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fraser, B. J. (1978b). Some attitude Scales for ninth grade science preview. School Science and Mathematics, 78(5), 379–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environment Research: An International Journal, 1, 7–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fraser, B. J., & Chionnh, Y. H. (2000). Classroom environment, self-esteem, achievement, and attitudes in geography and mathematics in Singapore. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  20. Germann, P. (1988). Development of the attitude towards science in school assessment and its use to investigate the relationship between science achievement and attitude towards science in school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 689–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haladyna, T., Olsen, R., & Shaughnessy, J. (1982). Relationships of student, teacher, and learning environment variables to attitudes toward science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(4), 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hazari, Z., Tai, R. H., & Sadler, P. M. (2007). Gender differences in introductory university physics performance: The influence of high school physics preparation and affective factors. Science Education, 91, 847–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 158–176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Hu, L., & Bender, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Katz, D., & Stotland, E. (1959). A preliminary statement to a theory of attitude structure and change. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 3, pp. 423–475). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  26. Keeves, J. P. (1975). The home, the school and achievement in mathematics and science. Science Education, 59(4), 439–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  28. Klop, T., & Severiens, S. (2007). An exploration of attitudes towards modern biotechnology: A study among Dutch secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 29(5), 663–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Koballa, T., & Crawley, F. (1985). The influence of attitude on science teaching and learning. School Science and Mathematics, 85, 222–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leong, F., & Austin, J. (2006). The psychology research handbook: A guide for graduate students and research assistants (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  31. Lichtenstein, M. J., Owen, S. V., Blalock, C. L., Liu, Y., Ramirez, K. A., Pruski, L. A., et al. (2008). Psychometric reevaluation of the scientific attitude inventory-revised (SAI-II). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 600–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Margianti, E. S., Fraser, B. J., & Aldridge, J. M. (2001, March). Learning environment, mathematical ability and students’ outcomes in university computing courses in Indonesia. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  33. Moss, C. H. (2001, March). Using environment assessments in improving teaching and learning in high school biology classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  34. Mueller, D. J. (1986). Measuring social attitudes. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  35. Mukoma, W., Flisher, A. J., Helleve, A., Aaro, L. E., Mathews, C., Kaaya, S., et al. (2009). Development and test–retest reliability of a research instrument designed to evaluate school-based HIV/AIDS interventions in South Africa and Tanzania. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 37, 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Munby, H. (1983). Thirty studies involving the “scientific attitude inventory”: What confidence can we have in this instrument? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(2), 141–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (1998–2006). Mplus user’s guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.Google Scholar
  38. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards Science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Palmer, D. (2009). Student interest generated during an inquiry skills lesson. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 147–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Patrick, H., Mantzicopoulos, P., & Samarapungavan, A. (2009). Motivation for learning science in kindergarten: Is there a gender gap and does integrated inquiry and literacy instruction make a difference. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 166–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Popham, W. J. (2009). Assessing student affect. Teaching Social Responsibility, 66(8), 85–86.Google Scholar
  42. Rosenberg, M. J., & Hovland, C. I. (1960). Cognitive, affective and behavioural components of attitudes. In C. I. Hovland & M. J. Rosenberg (Eds.), Attitude organisation and change: An analysis of consistency among attitude components (pp. 1–14). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Schaverien, L., & Cosgrove, M. (2000). A biological basis for generative learning in technology-and-science part II: Implications for technology-and-science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Scherz, Z., & Oren, M. (2006). How to change students’ images of science and technology. Science Education, 90(6), 965–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schibeci, R. A. (1982). Measuring student attitudes: Semantic differential or Likert instruments. Science Education, 66(4), 565–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schibeci, R. A., & McGaw, B. (1981). Empirical validation of the conceptual structure of a test of science-related attitudes. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41(4), 1195–1201.Google Scholar
  47. Shevlin, M., & Miles, J. N. V. (1998). Effects of sample size, model specification and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(1), 85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shrigley, R. L. (1988). Defining attitude for science educators. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 659–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Simpson, R. D., Koballa, T. R., Oliver, J. S., & Crawley, F. E. (1994). Research on the affective dimension of science learning. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 211–234). New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  50. Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1990). A summary of major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education, 74(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sjoberg, L., Derbaix, C., & Jansson, B. (1987). Preference and similarity: Affective and cognitive judgement? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 28(1), 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Talton, E. L., & Simpson, R. D. (1987). Relationships of attitude toward classroom environment with attitude toward and achievement in science among tenth grade biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(6), 507–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Taraban, R., Box, C., Myers, R., Pollard, R., & Bowen, C. W. (2007). Effects of active-learning experiences on achievement, attitudes, and behaviors in high school biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 960–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Teixeira Dos Santos, F. M., & Mortimer, E. F. (2003). How emotions shape the relationship between a chemistry teacher and her high school students. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1095–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zandvliet, D., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). A model of educational productivity for high school internet classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beijing Normal UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations