You are expected to describe the theory behind the measure, perform an exploratory factor analysis on the items assessing self-interest, benevolence, competence, and integrity, describe the steps taken to select the final items, and evaluate the psychometric properties (i.e., reliability, validity) of your final scale
Measures in the dataset In SPSS (Variable View) the demographics are presented first, followed by individual items from the new scale to measure political trust and each of the validating measures, and overall scores for the validating measures are presented at the end. The overall scores that have been created in the data are averages. For example, if there were 10 items, they were all added together and then divided by 10. i.e., ((item1 + item 2…..item10)/10). For these measures it is a good idea to look at the items and whether or not they were reverse scored in order to figure out what a higher score on the measure represents. You will need to create the overall score and/or factor scores for the new political measure, and this/these will be based on the final result you get for your factor analysis. Variables in SPSS: Demographics: · Age · Gender Voting orientation and behaviour: · Check the Label and Values columns in SPSS for more information. · PoliticalOrientation · “Some people speak in terms of political left and right. Use the slider to indicate where you stand from 0 (left wing) to 100 (Right wing) · Votein2016 · Fed2016 · NextElection · “Using the scale below, please indicate how likely it is that you will vote in the next Federal election, where 0 = Will not vote, 100 = Will definitely vote. New measure of trust in politicians: From SelfInt1 to Integ5 · These are the items to use for the EFA · Items with R at the end were reverse-scored. This has already been done so you do not need to modify these items. General Trust · Individual items: GenTrust1 to GenTrust6 · Overall score: GeneralTrust Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 18(2), 129-166. Political Trust (adapted from the American National Election Studies political trust measure) · Individual items: PolTrust1r to PolTrust4 · Overall score: PoliticalTrust http://www.electionstudies.org/nesguide/gd-index.htm Five factor model of personality Items Overall scale name N1 – N6 Neuroticism E1 – E6 Extraversion O1 – O6 Openness A1 – A6 Agreeableness C1 – C6 Conscientiousness Higher scores indicate higher levels of each personality trait Mullins-Sweatt, S. N., Jamerson, J. E., Samuel, D. B., Olson, D. R., & Widiger, T. A. (2006). Psychometric properties of an abbreviated instrument of the five-factor model. Assessment, 13(2), 119-137. Conspiratorial Ideation · Items: Conspiracy1 – Conspiracy 15 · Overall score: ConspiratorialIdeation Brotherton, R., French, C. C., & Pickering, A. D. (2013). Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: The generic conspiracist beliefs scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1-15. Populism · Items: Populism1 – Populism6 · Overall score: Populism Akkerman, A., Mudde, C., & Zaslove, A. (2014). How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative Political Studies, 47(9), 1324-1353. Support for a carbon tax A single item (CarbonTax) was used to assess how supportive people are for a carbon tax. “One important reason that contributes to climate change is the burning of fossil fuels and subsequent carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from industry, motor vehicles, and other sources. What is your opinion regarding the implementation of a carbon tax in the future.” This item was loosely based on research from the following paper: Hammar, H., & Jagers, S. C. (2006). Can trust in politicians explain individuals' support for climate policy? The case of CO2 tax. Climate Policy, 5(6), 613-625. 1 PSY30003 (2017) Individual Research Report You are expected to describe the theory behind the measure, perform an exploratory factor analysis on the items assessing self-interest, benevolence, competence, and integrity, describe the steps taken to select the final items, and evaluate the psychometric properties (i.e., reliability, validity) of your final scale. The following sections should be included in the report: 1) Title Page (in APA style) 2) Introduction (Background, rationale and framework for the measure): This section should: Provide a literature review of the construct. o Identify the construct to be measured. This is your opportunity to define the construct differently to the way in which your group defined it. If you choose to use the same definition as your group, do not plagiarise the first assignment by copying and pasting the definition. Write it in your own words, and extend on it wherever required. o Justify why it is useful or worthwhile to create this measure. o Identify measurement issues associated with the construct and/or existing measures. Include a statement about the expected factor structure of the new scale and/or form a factorial validity hypothesis Present at least one convergent and at least one discriminant validity hypothesis for the new scale o For the ease of collecting data, you will be provided with a range of measures which can be used for convergent/discriminant validity. You will need to select at least two of these measures and justify your selection of each. Note that you can use facet subscales of the validation measures for your hypotheses. Present two additional hypotheses of your choosing about the new scale or its subscales in relation to validity. Again, you can use facet subscales of the validation measures for your hypotheses. 3) Method Describe the sample and measures used in your validation strategy. Do not include scales that you did not use. You can include the following statement under the Procedure sub-section of the Method: “An online survey was completed by undergraduate students at an Australian university” 4) Results: This section should describe: The results from the factor analysis (or analyses if you performed more than one), including a justification for the extraction and rotation method used, factor analysis statistics, and a description of the scale and inter-factor correlations. If items were removed, also describe the process through which the decision was made to exclude these items. A reliability analysis of the (revised) measure, including Cronbach’s alpha and related item statistics (e.g., alpha if item deleted) for the composite scale and each of the subscales. 2 Descriptive statistics for all measures used. Correlations, t-tests, etc. as appropriate that address your validation hypotheses. 5) Discussion: This section should be similar to the Discussion section of a lab report. That is, it should present an evaluation of your (revised) measure, including: Statements about the factor structure, items included/deleted, and implications for the definition and measurement of the construct being investigated. A discussion of the reliability of the final scales. A discussion of the evidence for the validity of the scales. A discussion of any revisions to the scale and recommendations for how it should be validated in the future. 6) References: In-text referencing and the reference list should be in APA 6th ed. format. Marking The research report is worth 50% of your final grade in this unit, and will be marked out of 100. Weightings of individual sections are as follows: Title page: Mandatory (0 marks) Introduction: 25 marks Method: 10 marks Results: 30 marks Discussion: 30 marks References/presentation: 5 marks Submission requirements The assignment should be a maximum of 3000 words. This does NOT include the title page or References. There is no minimum or maximum word length for any specific section. Assignments should be double-spaced using a standard 12-point font. Use APA formatting throughout. As your formatting guide, refer to the APA Publication Manual and http://www.swinburne.edu.au/lib/studyhelp/referencingtool.html Assignments are to be submitted through Turnitin no later than 11.55pm on Sunday, November 19th. A cover sheet should also be included. You must check that your assignment submission has correctly uploaded, in an acceptable file format, well in advance of the deadline. Allow plenty of time to correct any technical difficulties, as they will not be considered the basis for any extension. http://www.swinburne.edu.au/lib/studyhelp/referencingtool.html 3 As per the unit outline, a penalty of 10% per day applies for late submissions. Submissions more than 5 days late will receive zero marks. Extensions may be granted in exceptional circumstances. Requests for extensions must be submitted to the convenor (Brad Elphinstone – belphinstone@swin.edu.au) before the due date. All extension requests must be accompanied by appropriate documentation (i.e., a medical certificate for illness, a counsellor’s/psychologist’s letter for psychological issues or personal circumstances). The documentation should indicate the length of time for which the student was impacted by the illness/circumstance. Remember that pressure of other work (whether university work or paid work) does not count as a basis for an extension. Students should not assume that they will be granted an extension until they are notified of its approval. Plagiarism, as always, will be taken extremely seriously. At the lowest level of severity, zero will be awarded for a particular section. More serious examples of plagiarism will result in a mark of zero being given for the assignment overall, or expulsion from the unit in accordance with Swinburne’s policies on Student Academic Misconduct: http://www.swinburne.edu.au/policies- regulations/statutes-regulations/student-academic-misconduct/ mailto:belphinstone@swin.edu.au http://www.swinburne.edu.au/policies-regulations/statutes-regulations/student-academic-misconduct/ http://www.swinburne.edu.au/policies-regulations/statutes-regulations/student-academic-misconduct/