Mathematics Attitudes and Mathematics Outcomes of U.S. and Belarusian Middle School Students

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 103, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 105-118

  Lipnevich, Anastasiya A ^a   MacCann, Carolyn ^b   Krumm, Stefan ^c   Burrus, Jeremy ^d   Roberts, Richard D ^d  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

^d EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cross cultural comparison; Mathematics achievement; Mathematics attitudes; Theory of planned behavior

Indexed keywords

EID: 79951789551     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0021949     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1991, 50:179-211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
2. Ajzen I. Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 2002, 32:665-683. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x.
3. Ajzen, I. (2006). Constructing a TpB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations (Revised). Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/ikg/zick/ajzen%20construction%20a%20tpb%20questionnaire.pdf.
4. Albarracin D., Johnson B.T., Zanna M.P. The handbook of attitudes 2005, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
5. Armitage C., Conner M. Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology 2001, 40:471-499.
6. Bagozzi R.P., Wong N., Abe S., Bergami M. Cultural and situational contingencies and the theory of reasoned action: Application to fast food restaurant consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2000, 9:97-106. doi: 10.1207/S15327663JCP0902_4.
7. Beauducel A., Wittmann W.W. Simulation study on fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis based on data with slightly distorted simple structure. Structural Equation Modeling 2005, 12:41-75. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1201_3.
8. Brislin R.W. The wording and translation of research instruments. Field methods in cross-cultural research: Cross-cultural research methodology series: Vol. 8. Field methods in cross-cultural research 1986, 137-164. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. W.J. Lonner, J.W. Berry (Eds.).
9. Browne M.W., Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research 1992, 21:230-258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005.
10. Byrne B.M. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming 2004, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
11. Chen C., Stevenson H.W. Motivation and mathematics achievement: A comparative study of Asian-American, Caucasian-American, and East Asian high school students. Child Development 1995, 66:1215-1234. doi: 10.2307/1131808.
12. Cialdini R.B., Goldstein N.J. Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology 2004, 55:591-621. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015.
13. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 2nd ed.
14. Fishbein M., Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research 1975, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
15. Floyd R.G., Evans J.J., McGrew K.S. Relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and mathematics achievement across the school-age years. Psychology in the Schools 2003, 40:155-171. doi: 10.1002/pits.10083.
16. Frenzel A.C., Pekrun R., Goetz T. Girls and mathematics-A " hopeless" issue? A control-value approach to gender differences in emotions towards mathematics. European Journal of Psychology of Education 2007, 22:497-514. doi: 10.1007/BF03173468.
17. Geary D.C. International differences in mathematical achievement: Their nature, causes, and consequences. Current Directions in Psychological Science 1996, 5:133-137. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.ep11512344.
18. Gonzales P., Guzmán J.C., Partelow L., Pahlke E., Jocelyn L., Kastberg D., Trevor W. Highlights from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), 2003 (NCES Report 2005-005) 2004, U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC.
19. Grieco E.M., Cassidy R.C. Overview of race and Hispanic origin: Census 2000 2001, Retrieved from the U.S. Census Bureau website: http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-1.pdf.
20. Hakstian A.R., Whalen T.E. A K-sample significance test for independent alpha coefficients. Psychometrika 1976, 41:219-231.
21. Hembree R., Dessart D.J. Effects of hand-held calculators in precollege mathematics education: A meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 1986, 17:83-99. doi: 10.2307/749255.
22. Hu L.T., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 1999, 6:1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.
23. Kloosterman P. Beliefs and achievement in seventh-grade mathematics. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 1991, 13:3-15.
24. Lee J., Grigg W.S., Dion G.S. The nation's report card: Mathematics 2007 (NCES Report 2007-494) 2007, U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC.
25. Lichkovsky E.E. International math competitions: Students' performance 2007, Ministry of Education, Minsk, Belarus.
26. Ma X., Kishor N. Assessing the relationship between attitude toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 1997, 28:26-47. doi: 10.2307/749662.
27. MacCann C., Duckworth A., Roberts R.D. Identifying the major facets of conscientiousness in high school students and their relationships with valued educational outcomes. Learning and Individual Differences 2009, 19:451-458.
28. Margolis H., McCabe P.P. Self-efficacy: A key to improving the motivation of struggling learners. Preventing School Failure 2004, 47:162-169. doi: 10.3200/TCHS.77.6.241-249.
29. Marsh H.W., Hau K.T., Wen Z. In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 2004, 11:320-341. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2.
30. Melancon J.G., Thompson B., Becnel S. Measurement integrity of scores from the Fennema-Sherman Mathematics Attitudes Scales: The attitudes of public school teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1994, 54:187-192. doi: 10.1177/0013164494054001024.
31. Middleton J.A., Spanias P.A. Motivation for achievement in mathematics: Findings, generalizations, and criticisms of the research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 1999, 30:65-88. doi: 10.2307/749630.
32. Midgley C., Feldlaufer H., Eccles J.S. Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after transition to junior high school. Child Development 1989, 60:981-992. doi: 10.2307/1131038.
33. Miller D.C., Sen A., Malley L. Comparative indicators of education in the United States and other G-8 countries: 2006 (NCES Report 2007-006) 2006, U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.
34. Minato S., Yanase S. On the relationship between students' attitudes towards school mathematics and their levels of intelligence. Educational Studies in Mathematics 1984, 15:313-320. doi: 10.1007/BF00312080.
35. Noftle E.E., Robins R.W. Personality predictors of academic outcomes: Big Five correlates of GPA and SAT scores. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2007, 93:116-130. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.116.
36. O'Connor M., Paunonen S.V. Big Five personality predictors of post-secondary academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences 2007, 43:971-990. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.03.017.
37. Randel B., Stevenson H.W., Witruk E. Attitudes, beliefs, and mathematics achievement of German and Japanese high school students. International Journal of Behavioral Development 2000, 24:190-198. doi: 10.1080/016502500383313.
38. Reyna V.F., Brainerd C.J. The importance of mathematics in health and human judgment: Numeracy, risk communication, and medical decision making. Learning and Individual Differences 2007, 17:147-159. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2007.03.010.
39. Rivera-Batiz F.I. Quantitative literacy and the likelihood of employment among young adults in the United States. Journal of Human Resources 1992, 27:313-328. doi: 10.2307/145737.
40. Roberts B.W., Chernyshenko O.S., Stark S., Goldberg L.R. The structure of conscientiousness: An empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Personnel Psychology 2005, 58:103-139. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00301.x.
41. Satorra A., Bentler P.M. A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika 2001, 66:507-514. doi: 10.1007/BF02296192.
42. Schmidt F.L., Hunter J.E. The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin 1998, 124:262-274. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262.
43. Schunk D.H. Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly 2003, 19:159-172. doi: 10.1080/10573560308219.
44. Sheeran P. Intention-behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review. European Review of Social Psychology 2002, 12:1-36. doi: 10.1080/14792772143000003.
45. Shinkevich A.S. Performance and preferences: Students' views on the importance and intrinsic value of school subjects 2006, Minsk Press, Minsk, Belarus.
46. Silich T.I. Education: Current trends- Research report of the Belarusian Ministry of Education 2007, Ministry of Education Press, Minsk, Belarus.
47. Singh K., Granville M., Dika S. Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. Journal of Educational Research 2002, 95:323-332. doi: 10.1080/00220670209596607.
48. Slavin R.E. When does cooperative learning increase student achievement?. Psychological Bulletin 1983, 94:429-445. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.94.3.429.
49. Slavin R.E., Leavey M., Madden N.A. Combining cooperative learning and individualized instruction: Effects on student mathematics achievement, attitudes, and behaviors. The Elementary School Journal 1984, 84:408-422. doi: 10.1086/461373.
50. Sowell E.J. Effects of manipulative materials in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 1989, 20:498-505. doi: 10.2307/749423.
51. Stevenson H.W., Newman R.S. Long-term prediction of achievement and attitudes in mathematics and reading. Child Development 1986, 57:646-659. doi: 10.2307/1130343.
52. Swanson L., Kim K. Working memory, short-term memory, and naming speed as predictors of children's mathematical performance. Intelligence 2007, 35:151-168. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2006.07.001.
53. Tapia M. An instrument to measure mathematics attitudes. Academic Exchange Quarterly 2004, 8:16-21.
54. Comparison of ACS and ASEC data on educational attainment: 2004 2004, U.S. Census Bureau, Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/educ-attn.html.
55. van Herk H., Poortinga Y.H., Verhallen T.M.M. Response styles in rating scales: Evidence of method bias in data from six EU countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 2004, 35:346-360. doi: 10.1177/0022022104264126.