The self-report measure supports a refined 13-item, four-factor model with good fit¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · no dated study recorded · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? CFA of the self-report measure supported a theoretically coherent four-factor structure (Concept, Use, Evaluate, Ethics), with the refined 13-item model showing good fit (CFI = .970; TLI = .961; RMSEA = .054; SRMR = 0.04). → sr-cfa
Evidence¶
sr-cfa¶
Shan Zhang, Ruiwei Xiao, Anthony F. Botelho, Guanze Liao, Thomas K. F. Chiu, John Stamper, and Kenneth R. Koedinger. 2026. How to Assess AI Literacy: Misalignment Between Self-Reported and Objective-Based Measures. In LAK26: 16th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK 2026). ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3785022.3785088
q2 · i? · associational · r2
CFA of the 13-item self-report model in the full sample (N = 288) demonstrated "good fit in the full sample" with the printed indices. Standardized loadings ranged from .62 to .83; overall Cronbach's alpha was 0.889; three items with loadings below .50 were removed to improve fit.
"This optimized model demonstrated good fit in the full sample (N= 288; 𝜒 2(59)= 109.29,𝑝<. 001; 𝜒 2/𝑑𝑓= 1.85; CFI = .970; TLI = .961; RMSEA = .054; SRMR = 0.04)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The objective-based measure yields a confirmed three-factor structure with acceptable fit in the full sample — related
- Both scales showed acceptable-to-good confirmatory factor fit in this sample — related
- Confirmatory factor analysis on FICSMath data confirms the 4C/ID Model's four components fit secondary-tertiary mathematics instructional experiences (CFI = 0.907, RMSEA = 0.050) — related
- The MRIM scale has a three-factor structure of planning, monitoring, and evaluating of interactive metadiscourse, cross-validated by EFA and CFA — related
- A confirmatory factor analysis supports a four-factor structure of collaborative group engagement (behavioural, social, cognitive, conceptual-to-consequential) for the QCGE self-assessment scale — related
- An ACO-derived 12-item short form (GenAI-SRL-12) retains the full scale's factor structure, reliability, and construct equivalence — related
- The ACE-HE measurement model of affective, behavioral, and cognitive engagement fits online/blended survey data well — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
sr-measure-four-factor-cfa |
title |
The self-report measure supports a refined 13-item, four-factor model with good fit |
description |
The self-report measure supports a refined 13-item, four-factor model with good fit |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-10 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — sr-cfa |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.