Skip to main content
Original Article

The Engagement/Disengagement in Sustainable Development Inventory (EDiSDI)

Psychometric Properties and Validity-Based Studies

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000619

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

  • Alisat, S., & Riemer, M. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J. S., & Pagani, L. S. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory, ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & Van Heerden, J. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061–1071. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1061 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Clayton, S. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. In S. ClaytonS. OpotowEds., Identity and the natural environment (pp. 45–66). The MIT Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (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. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Elliot, A. J., Gable, S., & Mcgregor, H. A. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549–563. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fredricks, J. A., Ye, F., Wang, M. T., & Brauer, S. (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. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Inman, R. A., Moreira, P. A. S., Cunha, D., & Castro, J. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kaiser, F. G., & Byrka, K. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kyriazos, T. A. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, J.-S. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Milfont, T. L., & Sibley, C. G. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Milfont, T. L., Wilson, J., & Diniz, P. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Moreira, P. A. S. (in press). The Youth Engagement with Global Sustainability Inventory (YEGSI): Development and validity-based studies. PsyEcology. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Moreira, P. A. S., Cunha, D., & Inman, R. A. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nisbet, E. K., & Zelenski, J. M. (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 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Preacher, K., Zhang, G., Kim, C., & Mels, G. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing, R Core Team. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., & Haviland, M. G. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reise, S. P., Scheines, R., Widaman, K. F., & Haviland, M. G. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness, Guilford Press. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., & Fuller, G. (2019). Sustainable Development Report 2019, Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Samejima, F. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Skinner, E. A., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Theodori, G. L., & Luloff, A. E. (2002). Position on environmental issues and engagement in proenvironmental behaviors. Society and Natural Resources, 15(6), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920290069128 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • United Nations General Assembly. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, UN. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, M.-T., & Fredricks, J. A. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, M.-T., Fredricks, J. A., Ye, F., Hofkens, T. L., & Linn, J. S. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, M.-T., Fredricks, J. A., Ye, F., Hofkens, T., & Linn, J. S. (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 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, M.-T., & Holcombe, R. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wolf, J., & Moser, S. C. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future, Oxford University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Yost, A. B., & Finney, S. J. (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 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar