Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Open AccessOriginalarbeit

Ein Vergleich traditioneller und computergestützter Methoden zur Erstellung einer deutschsprachigen Need for Cognition Kurzskala

Published Online:December 19, 2019https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924/a000242

Abstract

Zusammenfassung. Die vorliegende Arbeit dient der Entwicklung einer Kurzskala zur Messung von Need for Cognition (NFC). Neben traditionellen Verfahren der Itemreduktion auf Basis von Itemkennwerten der klassischen Testtheorie wurde in Studie 1 (N = 282) ein neues, computergestütztes Verfahren des „full information approach“ vorgestellt. Mithilfe der beiden Verfahren wurden 3 mögliche Skalen mit jeweils 5 Items selektiert, welche in einem unabhängigen Datensatz in Studie 2 (N = 530) Validierungskriterien unterzogen wurden. Aus den 3 Skalen mit ähnlichen Ergebnissen bezüglich der Gütekriterien wurde eine anhand der „full information approach“ erstellten Skalen als finale Kurzskala NFC-K ausgewählt. Diese NFC-K weist ein Cronbachs α von .69 auf, eine Korrelation mit der Langskala von .81 und keinen signifikanten Zusammenhang mit sozialer Erwünschtheit. Neben der systematischen und objektiven Selektion und Validierung der Kurzskala NFC-K stellt die vorliegende Arbeit auch eine Fallstudie zu den Herausforderungen der Kurzskalenentwicklung auf Basis klassischer und computergestützter Selektionsverfahren dar.


A Comparison of Traditional and Computer-Assisted Methods for the Development of a German Need for Cognition Short Scale

Abstract. The current study presents the development and validation of a Need for Cognition (NFC) short scale. In Study 1 (N = 282), traditional item selection procedures based on classic test theory were used as well as an innovative computational approach, our “full information approach.” The procedures led to three different short scales with comparable psychometric quality, which were validated in Study 2 (N = 530). Based on different validation criteria, one of the three scales obtained from the full information approach was selected as the final short scale NFC-K. This NFC-K achieved a Cronbach’s α of .69, a correlation of .81 with the original scale, and showed no significant correlation with social desirability. Besides presenting a systematic and objective selection and validation of the NFC-K, this article represents a case study of the challenges of developing a short scale comparing both traditional and computational approaches.

Literatur

  • Anseel, F., Lievens, F. & Schollaert, E. (2009). Reflection as a strategy to enhance task performance after feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 23 – 35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.003 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Asch, S. E. (1952). Social Psychology. New York, NY: Prentice-Hall. https://doi.org/10.1037/10025-000 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Asendorpf, J. B. (2015). Persönlichkeitsbereiche. In J. B. Asendorpf (Hrsg.), Persönlichkeitspsychologie für Bachelor (S. 65 – 120). Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46454-0-4 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Beierlein, C., Kemper, C. J., Kovaleva, A. & Rammstedt, B. (2013). Short scale for measuring general self-efficacy beliefs (ASKU). Methoden, Daten, Analysen, 7, 251 – 278. https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2013.014 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Beißert, H., Köhler, M., Rempel, M. & Beierlein, C. (2014). Eine deutschsprachige Kurzskala zur Messung des Konstrukts Need for Cognition. GESIS-WorkingPapers, 32. https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/40315 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Bertrams, A. & Dickhäuser, O. (2010). University and school students’ motivation for effortful thinking. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26, 263 – 268. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000035 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Berzonsky, M. D. & Sullivan, C. (1992). Social-cognitive aspects of identity style: Need for Cognition, experiential openness, and introspection. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 140 – 155. https://doi.org/10.1177/074355489272002 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Betsch, C. (2004). Präferenz für Intuition und Deliberation (PID). Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 25, 179 – 197. https://doi.org/10.1024/0170-1789.25.4.179 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Bless, H., Wänke, M., Bohner, G., Fellhauer, R. F. & Schwarz, N. (1994). Need for Cognition: Eine Skala zur Erfassung von Engagement und Freude bei Denkaufgaben. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 25, 147 – 154. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602321149858 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Borkenau, P. & Ostendorf, F. (2008). NEO-FFI: NEO-Fünf-Faktoren-Inventar nach Costa und McCrae. Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Brunner, M., Nagy, G. & Wilhelm, O. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs: Hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality, 80, 796 – 846. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cacioppo, J. T. & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116 – 131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A. & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197 – 253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E. & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306 – 307. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E. & Morris, K. J. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805 – 818. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.4.805 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cavazos, J. T. & Campbell, N. J. (2008). Cognitive style revisited: The structure X cognition interaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 498 – 502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14, 464 – 504. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chen, C., Himsel, A., Kasof, J., Greenberger, E. & Dmitrieva, J. (2006). Boundlss creativity: Evidence for the domain generality of individual differences in creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 40, 179 – 199. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2006.tb01272.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chen, C.-H. & Wu, I.-A. (2012). The interplay between cognitive and motivational variables in a supportive online learning system for secondary physical education. Computers and Education, 58, 542 – 550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.012 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Curşeu, P. L. (2011). Need for cognition and active information search in small student groups. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 415 – 418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.02.005 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V. & Heier, H. (1996). Individual Differences in Intuitive-Experiential and Analytical-Rational Thinking Styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 390 – 405. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.390 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Feldt, L. S., Woodruff, D. J. & Salih, F. A. (1987). Statistical inference for coefficient alpha. Applied psychological measurement, 11, 93 – 103. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168701100107 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fleischhauer, M., Enge, S., Brocke, B., Ullrich, J., Strobel, A. & Strobel, A. (2010). Same or different? Clarifying the relationship of need for cognition to personality and intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 82 – 96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209351886 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Forsterlee, R. & Ho, R. (1999). An examination of the short form of the need for cognition scale applied in an Australian sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 471 – 480. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131649921969983 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hahn, M. H. & Lee, K. C. (2016). Exploring the role of self-confidence, Need for Cognition, and the degree of IT support on individual creativity: Multilevel analysis approach. Current Psychology, 36, 565 – 576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9445-z First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Haugtvedt, C., Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T. & Steidley, T. (1988). Personality and ad effectiveness: Exploring the utility of need for cognition. Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 209 – 213. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hevey, D., Thomas, K., Pertl, M., Maher, L., Craig, A. & Chuinneagain, S.N. (2012). Method Effects and the Need for Cognition Scale. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 12, 20 – 33. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Jackson, P. H. & Agunwanba, C. C. (1977). Lower bounds for the reliability of the total score on a test composed of non-homogeneous items: I: Algebraic lower bounds. Psychometrika, 42, 567 – 578. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295979 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Klingsieck, K. B. & Fries, S. (2012). Allgemeine Prokrastination: Entwicklung und Validierung einer deutschsprachigen Kurzskala der General Procrastination Scale (Lay, 1986). Diagnostica, 58, 182 – 193. https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924/a000060 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Kruyen, P. M., Emons, W. H. & Sijtsma, K. (2012). Test length and decision quality in personnel selection: When is short too short? International Journal of Testing, 12, 32 – 1344. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2011.643517 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kruyen, P. M., Emons, W. H. & Sijtsma, K. (2013). On the shortcomings of shortened tests: A literature review. International Journal of Testing, 13, 223 – 248. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2012.703734 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Leite, W. L., Huang, I. C. & Marcoulides, G. A. (2008). Item selection for the development of short forms of scales using an ant colony optimization algorithm. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 43, 411 – 431. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170802285743 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Little, T. D., Lindenberger, U. & Nesselroade, J. R. (1999). On selecting indicators for multivariate measurement and modeling with latent variables: When ”good” indicators are bad and ”bad” indicators are good. Psychological Methods, 4, 192. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.2.192 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Maslow, A. H. (1943). Dynamics of personality organization. Psychological Review, 50, 514 – 539. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062222 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Moosbrugger, H. & Kelava, A. (2012). Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20072-4 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Murphy, G. (1947). Personality: A biosocial approach to origins and structure. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers. https://doi.org/10.1037/10759-000 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Musch, J., Brockhaus, R. & Bröder, A. (2002). Ein Inventar zur Erfassung von zwei Faktoren Sozialer Erwünschtheit. Diagnostica, 48, 121 – 129. https://doi.org/10.1026//0012-1924.48.3.121 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Mussel, P., Spengler, M., Litman, J. A. & Schuler, H. (2012). Development and validation of the German work-related curiosity scale. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28, 109 – 117. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000098 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (1998 – 2017). Mplus User’s Guide. Eighth Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Olson, K., Camp, C. & Fuller, D. (1984). Curiosity and need for cognition. Psychological Reports, 54, 71 – 74. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1984.54.1.71 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Pechtl, H. (2009). Anmerkungen zur Operationalisierung und Messung des Konstrukts „need for cognition.“ Diskussionspapier 05/09. Universität Greifswald. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 123 – 205). New York, NY: Academic Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • R Core Team (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Rammstedt, B. & John, O. P. (2005). Kurzversion des Big Five Inventory (BFI-K): Entwicklung und Validierung eines ökonomischen Inventars zur Erfassung der fünf Faktoren der Persönlichkeit. Diagnostica, 51, 195 – 206. https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924.51.4.195 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Reinhard, M.-A. & Dickhäuser, O. (2009). Need for cognition, task difficulty, and the formation of performance expectancies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1062 – 1076. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014927 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Sadowski, C. J. & Cogburn, H. E. (1997). Need for cognition in the big-five factor structure. The Journal of Psychology, 131, 307 – 312. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223989709603517 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Sandy, C. J., Gosling, S. D. & Koelkebeck, T. (2014). Psychometric comparison of automated versus rational methods of scale abbreviation: An illustration using a brief measure of values. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 221 – 235. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000144 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Sarnoff, I. & Katz, D. (1954). The motivational bases of attitude change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 115 – 124. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Schipolowski, S., Wilhelm, O., Schroeders, U., Kovaleva, A., Kemper, C. J. & Rammstedt, B. (2014). Eine kurze Skala zur Messung kristalliner Intelligenz: Die Kurzskala gc des Berliner Tests zur Erfassung Fluider und Kristalliner Intelligenz (BEFKI GC-K). Gesis Working Papers, 29. https://www.sssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/37786 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Smith, G. T., McCarthy, D. M. & Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12, 102 – 111. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.102 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Spinath, B., Stiensmeier-Pelster, J., Schöne, C. & Dickhäuser, O. (2012). Die Skalen zur Erfassung von Lern-und Leistungsmotivation (SELLMO). Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Van De Schoot, R., Schmidt, P., De Beuckelaer, A., Lek, K. & Zondervan-Zwijnenburg, M. (2015). Measurement invariance. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1064. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01064. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wilhelm, O., Schulze, R., Schmiedek, F. & Süß, H.-M. (2003). Interindividuelle Unterschiede im typischen intellektuellen Engagement. Diagnostica, 49, 49 – 60. https://doi.org/10.1026//0012-1924.49.2.49 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Ziegler, M., Kemper, C. J. & Kruyen, P. (2014). Short scales – Five misunderstandings and ways to overcome them. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 185 – 189. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000148 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar