The Murky Distinction Between Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: Beware of Lurking Jingle-Jangle Fallacies
The Murky Distinction Between Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: Beware of Lurking Jingle-Jangle Fallacies
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/edu0000281
复制
发表时间：
2019-02-01
影响因子：
4.9
通讯作者：
Arens, A. Katrin
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marsh, Herbert W.;Pekrun, Reinhard;Arens, A. Katrin
本研究扩展了经典的建设性对话/辩论之间的自我概念和自我效能感的研究人员（马什，罗氏，帕哈雷斯，和米勒，1997年）关于这两个结构之间的区别。这项研究是一个实质性的方法协同作用，汇集了新的实质性，理论和统计模型，并开发了经典的叮当响谬论的新测试。我们证明，在43所德国学校的数学班的3,350名学生的代表性样本中，广义数学自我效能感和数学结果预期与数学自我概念没有区别，但与测试相关的自我效能感和功能性措施不同。这与所提出的叮当作响的谬论是一致的。在前测变量的基础上，我们证明了负面的参考框架效应在社会（大鱼小池塘效应）和维度（内部/外部参考框架效应）比较三个自我概念样结构在中学的前4年。相比之下，在4年的测试中，两个自我效能感样结构中的任何一个都没有显著的参照系效应。控制前测变量后，每3个自我概念的结构（数学自我概念，结果预期，广义数学自我效能感）在每4年的中学更密切相关的后测结果（学校成绩，考试成绩，未来的愿望）比相应的2个自我效能感的因素。扩展Marsh等人（1997）的讨论，我们澄清了自我效能和自我概念之间的区别;评估、价值和结果预期在自我效能测量中的作用;和并发症的广义和全球措施的自我效能。教育的影响和影响声明积极的自我信念是一个中心结构在教育心理学，自我概念和自我效能感是积极自我信念中应用最广泛、理论上最重要的表征。在教育心理学中，许多努力已经花费在试图区分自我概念和自我效能。然而，在实践和理论上，这种区别仍然模糊不清。我们批评以前的概念试图区分这两种结构，反对一些区别，在过去已经提供了一些新的理论区别和新的实证方法来测试这些区别的支持。
This study extends the classic constructive dialogue/debate between self-concept and self-efficacy researchers (Marsh, Roche, Pajares, & Miller, 1997) regarding the distinctions between these 2 constructs. The study is a substantive-methodological synergy, bringing together new substantive, theoretical, and statistical models and developing new tests of the classic jingle-jangle fallacy. We demonstrate that in a representative sample of 3,350 students from math classes in 43 German schools, generalized math self-efficacy and math outcome expectancies were indistinguishable from math self-concept, but were distinct from test-related and functional measures of self-efficacy. This is consistent with the jingle-jangle fallacies that are proposed. On the basis of pretest variables, we demonstrate negative frame-of-reference effects in social (big-fish-little-pond effect) and dimensional (internal/external frame-of-reference effect) comparisons for three self-concept-like constructs in each of the first 4 years of secondary school. In contrast, none of the frame-of-reference effects were significantly negative for either of the two self-efficacy-like constructs in any of the 4 years of testing. After controlling for pretest variables, each of the 3 self-concept-like constructs (math self-concept, outcome expectancy, and generalized math self-efficacy) in each of the 4 years of secondary school was more strongly related to posttest outcomes (school grades, test scores, future aspirations) than were the corresponding 2 self-efficacy-like factors. Extending discussion by Marsh et al. (1997), we clarify distinctions between self-efficacy and self-concept; the role of evaluation, worthiness, and outcome expectancy in self-efficacymeasures; and complications in generalized and global measures of self-efficacy.Educational Impact and Implications StatementPositive self-beliefs are a central construct in educational psychology, and self-concept and self-efficacyare the most widely used and theoretically important representations of positive self-beliefs. In Educational Psychology, much effort has been expended in trying to distinguish between self-concept and self-efficacy. Nevertheless, in practice and theory the distinction remains murky. We critique previous conceptual attempts to distinguish the two constructs-arguing against some distinctions that have been offered in the past and offering some new theoretical distinctions and new empirical approaches to testing support for these distinctions.