Grit Across Nations: The Cross-National Equivalence of the Grit-O Scale

Author:

van Zyl Llewellyn E.ORCID,Heijenk Babet,Klibert Jeff,Shankland Rebecca,Verger Nicolas B.,Rothmann Sebastiaan,Cho Vincent,Feng Katherine,See-To Eric W. K.,Roll Lara C.,van der Meij Leander

Abstract

AbstractDespite its popularity in practice, the Grit-O Scale has shown inconsistent factorial structures and differing levels of internal consistency in samples outside the USA. The validity of the Grit-O Scale in different contexts is, therefore, questionable. As such, the purpose of this paper was to determine whether the Grit-O Scale could be used as a valid and reliable measure to compare grit across different nations. Specifically, the aim was to investigate the factorial validity, reliability, and concurrent validity of the Grit-O Scale and to investigate measurement invariance across three national cohorts (Europe, the USA, and Hong Kong). Data were gathered from 1888 respondents stemming from one USA- (n = 471), two Hong Kong- (n = 361) and four European (n = 1056) universities. A series of traditional CFA and less restrictive ESEM models were estimated and systematically compared to determine the best factorial form of the Grit-O Scale. The results showed that a bifactor ESEM model, with one general factor of overall grit and two specific factors (consistency of interest and perseverance of effort), fitted the data best, showed strong measurement invariance across the three samples, and showed itself to be a reliable measure. Furthermore, concurrent validity was established by showing that the three grit factors were directly and positively related to task performance. Meaningful latent comparisons between the three cultural cohorts could therefore be made. The results imply that cross-national comparisons of grit may only be problematic when traditional CFA approaches are favoured. In contrast, ESEM modelling approaches may compensate for cross-national differences in understanding grit and control for differences in the interpretation of the scale’s items. Therefore, the bifactor ESEM approach may be more appropriate for cross-cultural and cross-national comparison studies, as it allows for these differences to be meaningfully captured, modelled, and controlled for.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Reference63 articles.

1. Alexander, F. K. (2000). The changing face of accountability: Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 71(4), 411–431.

2. Amazon. (2018). Grit: The power of passion and perseverance. Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com/Grit‑Passion‑Perseverance‑Angela‑Duckworth/dp/1501111116?SubscriptionId=AKIAI2KQ2FKXUWTESZCA&tag=rt50004‑20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=1501111116#nav‑top. Accessed on 31 May 2022.

3. Areepattamannil, S., & Khine, M. S. (2018). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the original grit scale using Rasch analysis in an Arab adolescent sample. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36(8), 856–862.

4. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford.

5. Cattaneo, M., Horta, H., Malighetti, P., Meoli, M., & Paleari, S. (2019). Universities’ attractiveness to students: The Darwinism effect. Higher Education Quarterly, 73(1), 85–99.

Cited by 12 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3