Self-concept as a possible predictor of STEM career: adaptation of the questionnaire to measure five factors of self-concept

The problem of bringing girls into STEM-related specialty, is important for many countries, including Russia. Some studies show that various parameters of self-esteem can be associated with low representation of women in these professions. In order to assess the Russian data, concerning the extent to which self-esteem is related to the fact that women do not continue to work in STEM areas even after getting the corresponding education, the adaptation of English-language methodology based on multifactor self-evaluation (SDQ III) was held.For the purpose of adaptation of the questionnaire’sfull version we selected five factors which are proved to relate to infrequency of girls’ choices of STEM for professional training: "Mathematical self-estimation”, “Humanitarian self-estimation”, “Selfestimation of appearance”, “Self-estimation of relations with the same gender people”,“Self-estimation of relations with the opposite gender people”. The participants of the study were women (N = 532) over the age of 18 years. The confirmatory factoranalysisused to analyze thefactor structureofthequestionnaireproved the rightfulness of locationoffivetheoreticallylaidoutfactorsofself-estimation. Analysis of psychometric properties in modern test theory (IRT analysis) revealed that the questionnaire has satisfactory psychometric characteristics and can be used for the measurement of selected factors of self-estimation.

1. Stolin V.V. Samosoznanie lichnosti [Self identity]. Moskva: Izd-vo Mosk. un-ta, 1983. 285 p. (In Russ.).
2. Green J. et al. Academic motivation, self-concept, engagement, and performance in high school: Key processes from a longitudinal perspective. Journal of adolescence, 2012, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 1111–1122. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.02.016
3. Andrich D. A rating formulation for ordered response categories [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psychometrika, 1978, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 561–573. Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FBF02293814.pdf (Accessed 12.08.2018).
4. Barth J.M., Dunlap S., Chappetta K. The influence of romantic partners on women in STEM majors. Sex Roles, 2016, vol. 75, no. 3–4, pp. 110–125. doi:10.1007/s11199-016-0596-z
5. Betz N.E., Hackett G. Applications of self-efficacy theory to understanding career choice behavior. Journal of social and clinical psychology, 1986, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 279–289. doi:10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.279
6. Sax L.J. et al. “But I’m not good at math”: The changing salience of mathematical self-concept in shaping women’s and men’s STEM aspirations. Research in Higher Education, 2015, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 813–842. doi:10.1007/s11162-015-9375-x
7. Eccles J.S. Understanding women's educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement related choices. Psychology of women quarterly, 1994, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 585–609. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01049.x
8. Park L.E. et al. Effects of everyday romantic goal pursuit on women’s attitudes toward math and science. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2011, vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 1259–1273. doi:10.1177/0146167211408436
9. Linacre J.M. Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness [Elektronnyi resurs]. J Appl Meas, 2002, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 85–106. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.424.2811&rep=rep1&type=pdf (Accessed 12.08.2018).
10. Linacre J.M. Wright B. D. Winsteps. com A User's Guide to [Elektronnyi resurs]. Rasch-Model Computer Program. 2006. 130 p. Available at:http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.639.4296&rep=rep1&type=pdf https://www.winsteps.com/ (Accessed 12.08.2018).
11. Marsh H.W. SDQ I manual & research monograph: Self-Description Questionnaire. [San Diego, CA]: Psychological Corporation [and] Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988. 171 p.
12. Marsh H.W. Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ) II: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of adolescent self-concept: An interim test manual and a research monograph. New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney, Faculty of Education, 1992.
13. Marsh H.W. Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ) III: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of adolescent self-concept: An interim test manual and a research monograph. New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney, Faculty of Education, 1992
14. Marsh H.W. Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ): A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of adolescent self-concept: An interim test manual and a research monograph // New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney, Faculty of Education, 1992.
15. Marsh H.W., Craven R.G. Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on psychological science, 2006, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 133–163. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00010.x
16. Marsh H.W., O'NEILL R. Self description questionnaire III: the construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1984, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 153–174. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1984.tb00227.x
17. Marsh H.W., Shavelson R. Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure. Educational psychologist, 1985, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 107–123. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2003_1
18. Meade A.W., Lautenschlager G.J. Same question, different answers: CFA and two IRT approaches to measurement invariance [Elektronnyi resurs]. 19th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2004, vol. 1. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0685/2710c39ae93bfa090fc553d06e01b9751c46.pdf (Accessed 12.08.2018).
19. Moller J. et al. Meta-analytic path analysis of the internal/external frame of reference model of academic achievement and academic self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 2009, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 1129–1167.
20. Moksnes U.K., Espnes G.A. Self-esteem and life satisfaction in adolescents–gender and age as potential moderators. Quality of Life Research, 2013, vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 2921–2928. doi:10.1007/s11136-013-0427-4.
21. Muthen L.K. Mplus [Elektronnyi resurs]: Statistical Analysis With Latent Variables: User’s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012. 856 p. Available at:  https://www.statmodel.com/download/usersguide/Mplus%20user%20guide%20Ver_7_r6_web.pdf  (Accessed 12.08.2018)
22. Rhemtulla M., Brosseau-Liard P.E., Savalei V. When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological methods, 2012, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 354–373. doi:10.1037/a0029315
23. Rosenberg M. Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE) [Elektronnyi resurs]. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Measures, 2006, pp. 61–63. Available at: http://integrativehealthpartners.org/downloads/ACTmeasures.pdf#page=61 (Accessed 12.08.2018).
24. Settles I.H., O’Connor R.C., Yap S.C.Y. Climate Perceptions and Identity Interference Among Undergraduate Women in STEM: The Protective Role of Gender Identity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 2016, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 488–503. doi:10.1177/0361684316655806
25. Shavelson R.J., Hubner J.J., Stanton G.C. Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of educational research, 1976, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 407–441. doi:10.3102/00346543046003407
26. Carli L.L. et al. Stereotypes about gender and science: Women≠ scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 2016, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 244–260.
27. Wang M.T., Eccles J.S., Kenny S. Not lack of ability but more choice: Individual and gender differences in choice of careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Psychological science, 2013, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 770–775. doi:10.1177/0956797612458937
28. Zeldin A.L., Britner S.L., Pajares F. A comparative study of the self-efficacy beliefs of successful men and women in mathematics, science, and technology careers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 2008, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 1036–1058. doi:10.1002/tea.20195