No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This study tested the construct validity of a preschool measure of executive function (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function; BRIEF-P) through support of convergent and discriminant validity using the multitrait-multimethod validation process. Convergent validity was examined through teacher ratings of executive function and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and through the measurement of executive function on a performance measure. Determination of discriminant validity was attempted through teacher ratings of executive function and anxious/shy behaviors and through performance measures of visuospatial processing. Participants were placed in one of two groups: a control group/no diagnosis (n = 21) or an ADHD Group (n = 14). Group comparisons were conducted using t-tests and chi-square analysis and determined group differences related to gender, ethnic background, IQ, and age. An Analysis of covariance, controlling for gender, indicated significantly higher teacher ratings of preschool-age children with ADHD than without ADHD on the BRIEF-P. Pearson correlations suggest a strong relationship between similar constructs utilizing same method procedures and a moderate relationship measuring the same construct between measures. Discriminant validity was unable to be established due to non significant relationships between the same trait/between methods and different trait/between methods correlations. However, the small number of participants (n = 35) and poor teacher return rate of questionnaires (control n = 7; ADHD n = 14) may have affected the results of this study. There were several other limitations of this study, including the design of the study and the extended length of time to complete the study. / School Psychology

In this study, 236 heavy-drinking college students completed measures of self-efficacy for limiting drinking, specific coping skills for limiting drinking, outcome expectancies associated both with expected effects of drinking and expected effects of limiting drinking, and retrospective drinking behavior. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to examine reliability and validity, as well as serving as a pre-requisite for structural equation modeling (SEM). Results were generally consistent with predictions and supported the distinction between self-efficacy and outcome expectancies. One notable exception was that positive expectancies for limiting drinking did not load heavily on the predicted expectancy construct. Three models predicting drinking were compared utilizing SEM. The first was a model in which all constructs predicted drinking with no indirect effects. The second was based upon the ideas of Kirsch (1995) and predicted that outcome expectancies influence self-efficacy judgments. The third was based upon Bandura's (1986) theory and predicted that self-efficacy judgments would instead influence outcome expectancies. Both the models based on Kirsch and Bandura appeared to better fit the data than the model with no indirect effects. Differences in model-fit between models based on Kirsch and Bandura were not large, but slightly supported the Kirsch model. Additional analyses also supported the importance of outcome expectancies in predicting drinking behavior. Implications for theory and future directions for research are discussed. / Ph. D.

Despite the growing popularity of goal orientation research, three questions remain largely unanswered: (1) are there 3 factors of goal orientation or only 2; (2) what predicts goal orientation; and (3) is goal orientation domain specific? To help answer these questions, 177 undergraduates were given a questionnaire assessing, in both the academic and athletic domains, (a) learning, prove, and avoid goals, (b) self-perceived ability, ability, and implicit theories, and (c) high-school grade point average, intrinsic motivation, internal motivation, self-efficacy, locus of control, need for achievement, desire to win, and fear of negative evaluation. The results suggest that learning, prove, and avoid goals can be empirically distinguished, that they are domain specific, but that they are not predicted well by ability, self-perceived ability, or implicit theories. Discussion centers on the need for a pattern approach to the prediction of goal orientation and stresses the importance of examining the interactions among learning, prove, and avoid goals. The overriding conclusion, however, is that goal orientation is not a useful construct. / Master of Science