Volume 2, Issue 1 (March 2020)                   Iranian Evolutionary and Educational Psychology 2020, 2(1): 46-56 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Sadeghi A, Doostani P, Hu S. (2020). Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Career Feedback Inventory in an Iranian High School Students Sample. Iranian Evolutionary and Educational Psychology. 2(1), 46-56. doi:10.29252/ieepj.2.1.46
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-160-en.html
1- Department of counseling, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan
2- School of Education Science, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210000, Jiangsu Province
Abstract:   (1870 Views)
The purpose of the present study was to examine the structural and construct validity of the FCG inventory as applied in Iran. Feedback on Career Goals (FCG) Inventory was devised and validated by Hu, Creed, and Hood (2017) and was later used to measure career feedback among Chinese and Australian university students. The statistical population of this study consisted of all high school students in Isfahan in the academic year of 2018-2019, and 324 students (166 females and 158 males) were selected through cluster sampling as the sample size. Then, the students were administered a translated version of the FCG inventory, and their responses were examined with respect to the structure of the inventory. Results of confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated that three factors of feedback on progress, goal suitability, and improvements needed loaded on one higher-order factor of career feedback, similar to the structure of the FCG inventory applied in Chinese and Australian students. The results also provided support for construct validity of the scale by linking career feedback with career goal-performance discrepancies and career-related stress. Our findings suggest that the Iranian version of the FCG inventory has acceptable psychometric properties and is a valid instrument for the assessment of career feedback.
Full-Text [PDF 396 kb]   (747 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original | Subject: Educational Psychology
Received: 2019/10/15 | Accepted: 2020/02/25 | Published: 2020/03/26

1. Anderson, K. L., & Mounts, N. S. (2012). Searching for the self: An identity control theory approach to triggers of occupational exploration. The Journal of genetic psychology, 173(1), 90-111. [DOI:10.1080/00221325.2011.573027]
2. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of educational research, 65(3), 245-281. [DOI:10.3102/00346543065003245]
3. Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Aikin, K. J. (1996). An Examination of the Relative Impact of Assigned Goals and Self‚ÄźEfficacy on Personal Goals and Performance Over Time. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(12), 1084-1103. [DOI:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb01126.x]
4. Choi, B. Y., Park, H., Nam, S. K., Lee, J., Cho, D., & Lee, S. M. (2011). The development and initial psychometric evaluation of the Korean Career Stress Inventory for college students. The Career Development Quarterly, 59(6), 559-572. [DOI:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2011.tb00976.x]
5. Chowdhury, R. R., & Kalu, G. (2004). Learning to give feedback in medical education. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist, 6(4), 243-247. [DOI:10.1576/toag.]
6. Creed, P. A., & Hood, M. (2015). The development and initial validation of a scale to assess career goal discrepancies. Journal of Career Assessment, 23(2), 308-317. [DOI:10.1177/1069072714535175]
7. Creed, P. A., Wamelink, T., & Hu, S. (2015). Antecedents and consequences to perceived career goal-progress discrepancies. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 87, 43-53. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvb.2014.12.001]
8. de Kleijn, R. A., Mainhard, M. T., Meijer, P. C., Pilot, A., & Brekelmans, M. (2012). Master's thesis supervision: Relations between perceptions of the supervisor-student relationship, final grade, perceived supervisor contribution to learning and student satisfaction. Studies in Higher Education, 37(8), 925-939. [DOI:10.1080/03075079.2011.556717]
9. Dobrow, S. R., & Tosti-Kharas, J. (2012). Listen to your heart? Calling and receptivity to career advice. Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 264-280. [DOI:10.1177/1069072711434412]
10. Donovan, J. J., & Williams, K. J. (2003). Missing the mark: effects of time and causal attributions on goal revision in response to goal-performance discrepancies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 379. [DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.379]
11. Doostani, P., & Sadeghi, A. (2018). The Effect of Career Goal Feedback on Academic Buoyancy: The Mediating role of Career Goal Discrepancy and Career-Related Stress. journal of Career & Organization Counseling, 9(33), 49-67.
12. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multirative data analysis: A global perspective: New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
13. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112. [DOI:10.3102/003465430298487]
14. Herold, D. M., & Greller, M. M. (1977). Feedback the definition of a construct. Academy of Management Journal, 20(1), 142-147. [DOI:10.5465/255468]
15. Hu, S., Creed, P. A., & Hood, M. (2017). Development and initial validation of a measure to assess career goal feedback. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(7), 657-669. [DOI:10.1177/0734282916654645]
16. Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349. [DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.64.4.349]
17. Jabariangroo, M., Khosravi, M., & Mohammadifar, M. A. (2016). Effect of the Teacher's Oral and Written Feedback on Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement in Math. Research in Curriculum Development, 22(49), 151-138.
18. Jones, P. S., Lee, J. W., Phillips, L. R., Zhang, X. E., & Jaceldo, K. B. (2001). An adaptation of Brislin's translation model for cross-cultural research. Nursing research, 50(5), 300-304. [DOI:10.1097/00006199-200109000-00008]
19. Khoshkholgh, E. (2011). Principle and Practical Guide to Preparing and Providing regarding university studentds' academic performance. World Applied Science, 26(10), 1385-1390.
20. Kim, B., Jung, S. H., Jang, S. H., Lee, B., Rhee, E., Cho, S. H., & Lee, S. M. (2014). Construction and initial validation of the Planned Happenstance Career Inventory. The Career Development Quarterly, 62(3), 239-253. [DOI:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2014.00082.x]
21. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological bulletin, 119(2), 254. [DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254]
22. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1998). Feedback interventions: Toward the understanding of a double-edged sword. Current directions in psychological science, 7(3), 67-72. [DOI:10.1111/1467-8721.ep10772989]
23. Koh, L. C. (2008). Refocusing formative feedback to enhance learning in pre-registration nurse education. Nurse Education in Practice, 8(4), 223-230. [DOI:10.1016/j.nepr.2007.08.002]
24. Magill, R. A., & Anderson, D. I. (2007). Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications (Vol. 11): McGraw-Hill New York.
25. McLaughlin, A. C., Rogers, W. A., & Fisk, A. D. (2006). Importance and interaction of feedback variables: A model for effective, dynamic feedback: Georgia Institute of Technology.
26. Ramsden, P. (1988). Studying learning: Improving teaching. Improving learning: New perspectives, 13-31.
27. Schartel, S. A. (2012). Giving feedback-An integral part of education. Best practice & research Clinical anaesthesiology, 26(1), 77-87. [DOI:10.1016/j.bpa.2012.02.003]
28. Schmidt, R., & Lee, T. (1998). Motor Control & Learning-5th ED. Champaign: Human Kinetics.
29. Sims, H. P., Szilagyi, A. D., & Keller, R. T. (1976). The measurement of job characteristics. Academy of Management journal, 19(2), 195-212. [DOI:10.2307/255772]
30. Waddell, C. A. (2004). The effects of negotiated written feedback within formative assessment on fourth grade students' motivation and goal orientations.
31. Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., & Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample Size Requirements for Structural Equation Models: An Evaluation of Power, Bias, and Solution Propriety. Educ Psychol Meas, 76(6), 913-934. doi: 10.1177/0013164413495237 [DOI:10.1177/0013164413495237]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.