The Engagement/Disengagement in Sustainable Development Inventory (EDiSDI)
Psychometric Properties and Validity-Based Studies
Abstract
Abstract. There is an urgent need to meet the goals outlined in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Such advancements require people to adopt pro sustainable development behaviors. Research on engagement with sustainable development has the potential to provide a vital understanding of how individual differences and contextual factors interact to shape such behaviors. Our aim was to offer a theoretical framework for engagement, imported from Educational Psychology, and from it develop the Engagement/Disengagement in Sustainable Development Inventory (EDiSDI). In Study 1 (n = 266; Mage = 38.6 years; 83% female), an exploratory factor analysis identified three engagement and three disengagement factors. In Study 2 (n = 510; Mage = 31.6 years; 58% female), confirmatory factor analyses supported a bifactor model with two negatively correlated general factors (engagement and disengagement). Using a bifactor model, engagement was positively (and disengagement negatively) correlated with nature relatedness, environmental identity, and environmental action. Item response theory analyses revealed good item discrimination. These results validate both the proposed framework and EDiSDI for use in research on engagement with sustainable development. Future research is needed to determine if engagement and disengagement in sustainable development are distinct constructs, or opposing ends of a continuum.
References
2015). The environmental action scale: Development and psychometric evaluation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.05.006
(2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits
(2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
(2009). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
(2001). The basics of item response theory, ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.
(2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061–1071. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1061
(1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005
(2003).
(Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition . In S. ClaytonS. OpotowEds., Identity and the natural environment (pp. 45–66). The MIT Press.1991).
(Competence, autonomy and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes . In M. R. GunnarL. A. SroufeEds., Minnesota symposium on child psychology (pp. 43–77). Erlbaum.1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
(1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549–563.
(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
(2019).
(Profiles of school disengagement: Not all disengaged students are alike . In J. A. FredricksA. L. ReschlyS. L. ChristensonEds., Handbook of student engagement interventions: Working with disengaged students (pp. 31–43). Academic Press.1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
(2020). Assessing the dimensionality of the Student School Engagement Survey: Support for a multidimensional bifactor model. Revista de Psicodidáctica (English ed.), 25, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicoe.2020.03.001
(2011). Environmentalism as a trait: Gauging people’s prosocial personality in terms of environmental engagement. International Journal of Psychology, 46(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.516830
(2018). Applied psychometrics: Sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology, 9, 2207–2230. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.98126
(2014). The relationship between student engagement and academic performance: Is it a myth or reality? Journal of Educational Research, 107(3), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2013.807491
(2011). Trajectories of school engagement during adolescence: Implications for grades, depression, delinquency, and substance use. Developmental Psychology, 47(1), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021307
(2007). Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global Environmental Change, 17(3–4), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.01.004
(2012). The big five personality traits and environmental engagement: Associations at the individual and societal level. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.12.006
(2012). Time perspective and environmental engagement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Psychology, 47(5), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2011.647029
(in press). The Youth Engagement with Global Sustainability Inventory (YEGSI): Development and validity-based studies. PsyEcology.
(2020). An integration of multiple student engagement dimensions into a single measure and validity-based studies. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38, 564–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282919870973
(2013). The NR-6: A new brief measure of nature relatedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(Nov), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00813
(2009). The Nature Relatedness Scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 715–740. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508318748
(2013). Choosing the optimal number of factors in exploratory factor analysis: A model selection perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48, 28–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2012.710386
(2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing, R Core Team.
. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(6), 544–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.496477
(2013). Multidimensionality and structural coefficient bias in structural equation modeling: A bifactor perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164412449831
(2016). Applying bifactor statistical indices in the evaluation of psychological measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(3), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1089249
(2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness, Guilford Press.
(2019). Sustainable Development Report 2019, Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN).
(1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, 34, 1–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1968.tb00153.x
(2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840
(2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233
(2002). Position on environmental issues and engagement in proenvironmental behaviors. Society and Natural Resources, 15(6), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920290069128
(2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, UN.
. (2014). The reciprocal links between school engagement, youth problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence. Child Development, 85(2), 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12138
(2016). The Math and Science Engagement scales: Scale development, validation, and psychometric properties. Learning and Instruction, 43, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.008
(2017). Conceptualization and assessment of adolescents’ engagement and disengagement in school: A multidimensional school engagement scale. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000431
(2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633–662. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209361209
(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
(2011). Individual understandings, perceptions, and engagement with climate change: Insights from in-depth studies across the world. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2(4), 547–569. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.120
(1987). Our common future, Oxford University Press.
. (2018). Assessing the unidimensionality of trait reactance using a multifaceted model assessment approach. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(2), 186–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2017.1280044
(