ویژگی های روان سنجی مقیاس حافظه: اندازه گیری کارکردهای روزانه حافظه در دانش آموزان

نویسندگان
سیاوش طالع پسند
صدیقه نصیری پور
دانشگاه سمنان
چکیده
هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی ویژگی های روان سنجی مقیاس حافظه در کارکردهای روزانه بود. طرح پژوهش از نوع همبستگی بود. جامعه پژوهش حاضر را کلیه دانش آموزان مدارس ابتدایی شهر سمنان تشکیل داده اند. تعداد 220 نفر از دانش آموزان با روش نمونه گیری تصادفی خوشه ای انتخاب و والدین آن ها به مقیاس حافظه(گیورتن و همکاران، 2018) پاسخ دادند. از 22SPSS و8,54 Lisrel و از روش­های تحلیل­عاملی، ضریب آلفای­کرونباخ، تحلیل واریانس چند متغیری و منحنی راک برای تحلیل داده ها استفاده شد. در زمینه روایی سازه بین دو گروه دانش آموزان عادی و دانش آموزان مبتلا به اختلال یادگیری در تمام مؤلفه های حافظه؛ یادگیری هدفمند، سازمان دهی/کشف کردن، حافظه کاری و یادگیری خودکار/روندی تفاوت معنی داری وجود داشت. در زمینه روایی تشخیصی سطوح زیر منحنی راک برای هر مؤلفه نشان داد، این مقیاس توانایی تمایزگذاری بین دانش آموزان عادی و دانش آموزان مبتلا به اختلال یادگیری را دارا می باشد. مقیاس حافظه از همسانی درونی و ضریب ثبات مناسبی برخوردار است. نتایج تحلیل­عاملی نشان داد که این مقیاس از چهار عامل یادگیری هدفمند، یادگیری خودکار/ روندی، حافظه کاری و سازمان دهی و کشف کردن ساخته شده است. آلفای کرونباخ برای یادگیری هدفمند 86/0، سازمان دهی/کشف کردن 77/0، حافظه کاری 70/0 و یادگیری خودکار/روندی 82/0 و برای کل مقیاس 93/0 بود. یافته های پژوهش بیانگر این است که نسخه فارسی پرسش نامه حافظه در جامعه دانش آموزان از خصوصیات روان سنجی قابل قبولی برخوردار است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
حافظه
یادگیری هدفمند
یادگیری خودکار/ روندی
حافظه کاری
سازمان دهی/ کشف کردن

عنوان مقاله English

Psychometric characteristics of Memory Scale: Measure of everbody functions of memory in students

نویسندگان English

sivash Talepasand
Sedighe Nasiripoor
Semnan University
چکیده English

The purpose of this study was to examine psychometric characteristics of memory scale: measure of everbody functions of memory in students. The research design is a correlation type. The population of this study is all students of elementary schools in Semnan city. 220 students were selected by cluster random sampling method and their parents responded to the memory scale (Geurtin et al., 2018). SPSS-22 and Lisrel 8.54 were used for data analysis, Cronbach's alpha coefficient, multivariate analysis of variance and rock curves. In the context of construct validity there was a significant difference between the two groups; normal students and students with learning disabilities in all components of memory; effortful/intentional learning, automatic/procedural learning, working memory and prospective memory/organization. In the context of the discriminant validity, the levels below the rock curve for each component showed the ability to differentiate between normal students and students with learning disabilities. The memory scale has an internal consistency and a good stability coefficient. The results of the factor analysis showed that this scale was made up of four factors of effortful/intentional learning, automatic/procedural learning, working memory and prospective memory/organization. Cronbach's alpha for effortful/intentional learning was 0.86, prospective memory/organization of 0.77, working memory 0.70, and , automatic/procedural learning 0.82 and for the whole scale 0.93. Findings of the research indicate that the Persian version of the memory questionnaire in the students’ community has acceptable psychometric properties.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Memory
effortful/intentional learning
automatic/procedural learning
working memory and prospective memory/organization
Alloway, T. P., Gathercole, S. E., Holmes, J., Place, M., Elliott, J. G., & Hilton, K. (2009). The diagnostic utility of behavioral checklists in identifying children with ADHD and children with working memory deficits. Child psychiatry and human development, 40(3), 353-366.
Alloway, T. P., Gathercole, S. E., Kirkwood, H., & Elliott, J. (2009). The working memory rating scale: A classroom-based behavioral assessment of working memory. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(2), 242-245.
Alloway, T. P., Gathercole, S. E., Kirkwood, H., & Elliott, J. (2009). The working memory rating scale: A classroom-based behavioral assessment of working memory. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(2), 242-245.
Baddeley, A. D,. & Hitch, G. J,. (1974). Working memory. In G. A. Bower (Ed.). Recent advances in learning and motivation (Vol. 8,pp. 47–90). New York: Academic Press.
Conway, A. R., Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working memory capacity and itsrelation to general intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(12), 547–552.
Cowan, N. (1995). Attention and memory: An integrated framework. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Drysdale, K., Shores, A., & Levick, W. (2004). Use of the everyday memory questionnaire with children. Child Neuropsychology, 10(2), 67-75.
Gathercole, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. (1993). Phonological working memory: A critical building block for reading development and vocabulary acquisition?. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 8(3), 259.
Geurten, M., Catale, C., Geurten, C., Wansard, M., & Meulemans, T. (2016). Studying self-awareness in children: validation of the Questionnaire of Executive Functioning (QEF). The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 30(4), 558-578.
Geurten, M., Majerus, S., Lejeune, C., & Catale, C. (2018). Questionnaire of Memory (Q-MEM): A new measure of everyday memory functioning in school-age children. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 7(1), 44-51.
Gilotty, L., Kenworthy, L., Sirian, S., Black, D. O., & Wagner, A. E. (2002). Adaptive skills and executive function in autism spectrum disorders. Child Neuropsychology, 8, 241–248.
Gonzalez, L. M., Anderson, V. A., Wood, S. J., Mitchell, L. A., Heinrich, L., & Harvey, A. S. (2008). The Observer Memory Questionnaire—Parent Form: Introducing a new measure of everyday memory for children. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 14(2), 337-342.
Hedges, R., Drysdale, K., & Levick, W. R. (2015). The children’s memory questionnaire-revised, Applied Neurop-sychology: Child, 4, 285–296.
Kadesjo, B., Janols, L. O., Korkman, M., Mickelsson, K., Strand, G., Trillingsgaard, A., & Gilleberg, C. (2004). The FTF (five to fifteen): The development of a parent question-naire for the assessment of ADHD and co-morbid conditions, European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 13, 3–13.
Kandel, E.R., Schwartz, J.H. and Jessell, T.M. eds. (2000). Principles of neural science (Vol. 4, pp. 1227-1246). New York: McGraw-hill.
Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working-memory capacity and the control ofattention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and taskset to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(1),47–70.
Kercood, S,. Grskovic, J,. Banda, D,. Begeske, J. (2014). Working Memory and Autism. Journal of Research in Autism Spectrum Disorder, 8, 1316-1332.
Kercood, S,. Grskovic, J,. Banda, D,. Begeske, J. (2014). Working Memory and Autism. Journal of Research in Autism Spectrum Disorder, 8, 1316-1332.
Laberge, D,. & Samuels, S. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognition Psychology, 6(2), 293- 323.
Miller , R. (1996). Structural Equation Modeling: Introducing Lisrel and EQS. Translated by Siavash Tale-Pasand (2011). Semnan: Semnan University Press. [persian]
Safari, S. & Bratlu, A. (1395). Part Five: Performance Functionality and Level Under the Rock Curve. Emergency Medicine Magazine. 3, 3, 119-121.[persian]
Sarah, R,. Allred, I,. Jonathan, I,. Flombaum, R. (2014). Relating color working memory and color perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(11), 562-565.
Schmeichel, B. J., & Demaree, H. A. (2010). Working memory capacity and sponta-neous emotion regulation: High capacity predicts self-enhancement in responseto negative feedback. Emotion, 10(5), 739–744.
Skowronek, J. S., Leichtman, M. D., & Pillemer, D. B. (2008). Long‐term episodic memory in children with attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23(1), 25-35.
Thorell, L. B., & Nyberg, L. (2008). The Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI): A new rating instrument for parents and teachers. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33(4), 536-552.
Tinsley, H. E., & Tinsley, D. J. (1987). Uses of factor analysis in counseling psychology research. Journal of counseling psychology, 34(4), 414.
Tulving, E. (1995). Organization of memory: Quo vadis. The cognitive neurosciences, 839847.
Vriezen, E. R., & Smith, M. L. (1996). Parent reports of everyday memory problems in normal children and children with brain dysfunction. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 2(1), 40.