Confirmatory factor analysis supports a second-level participation style model with four combined styles and acceptable fit indices¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Second-level CFA with 693 participants showed acceptable fit for the participation style model combining Why and How factors into four styles (RMSEA = 0.051, CFI = 0.97, NNFI = 0.96). → Pala Ferhat Kadir 2020

Evidence¶

Pala Ferhat Kadir 2020¶

Pala Ferhat Kadir, Erdem Mukaddes. (2020). Development of a participation style scale for online instructional discussions. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09817-x

q2 · i? · design · r3

Confirmatory factor analysis with 693 participants tested a second-level model combining the four Why and four How factors. Table 6 reports χ2 = 1254.84, df = 446, χ2/df = 2.81, RMSEA = 0.051, S-RMR = 0.063, GFI = 0.90, NNFI = 0.96, CFI = 0.97, IFI = 0.97, which the article describes as "acceptable values." No effect size is printed.

"As can be seen in Table 6, according to the data obtained from the second-level CFA, the participation style scale has acceptable values."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The scale's internal consistency is acceptable, with Cronbach's alpha of 0.89 for the full scale and 0.70–0.85 for its four style factors
• Exploratory factor analysis of the participation style scale yields four Why factors and four How factors explaining over 53% of variance in each dimension
• The hypothesised three-variable structural model fits the survey data well across printed fit indices — related