15.08.2013 Views

Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...

Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...

Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

individual data points. Even though internal consistencies can take on any value less than or<br />

equal to 1, where the positive values are more meaningful, higher values <strong>of</strong> .70 or more are more<br />

desirable (Lomax, 2001).<br />

While there were low internal consistencies for each Action and Justification subscale<br />

within each <strong>of</strong> the four stories, within story correlations revealed mixed patterns <strong>of</strong> significance<br />

indicating methodological problems with combining both story character role and story form <strong>of</strong><br />

victimization for story analysis. One explanation might be that multiple story variables within a<br />

single story confused children as the tried to imagine multiple roles and forms <strong>of</strong> victimization.<br />

Future studies should use stories that clearly delineate single variables in order to eliminate<br />

confounding variables.<br />

Another explanation for low internal consistencies within stories might be the way in<br />

which the measure was administered. Children were only given the option <strong>of</strong> the online format<br />

and completing the measure in a group setting among their peers. <strong>The</strong>y did not have the option <strong>of</strong><br />

using paper and pencil or to participate in an individual setting. Children might have lost<br />

concentration and responded by keying the same values such as all 1’s or 5’s, or with a repeated<br />

sequence <strong>of</strong> values in order to quickly complete the task. Upon close examination <strong>of</strong> the response<br />

data, only two <strong>of</strong> original 165 participants either failed to complete the survey and were<br />

eliminated from the data set. Another possibility might have been that children were confused<br />

about how to interpret rated items or by the directions such as what was meant by the terms<br />

good, bad, best or worst. Even though the researcher addressed all questions that were asked by<br />

children and maintained close proximity in order to answer individual questions, the possibility<br />

exists that children might have been reluctant to raise questions in the group for fear <strong>of</strong> calling<br />

attention to themselves among their peers. For future studies, the peer effect can be controlled for<br />

140

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!