Journal of Black Psychology http://jbp.sagepub.

com/

A Validity Study of Scores on the Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory Based on a Sample of Black College Males
Malcolm H. Woodland Journal of Black Psychology 2008 34: 452 originally published online 12 June 2008 DOI: 10.1177/0095798408316795 The online version of this article can be found at: http://jbp.sagepub.com/content/34/4/452

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association of Black Psychologists

Additional services and information for Journal of Black Psychology can be found at: Email Alerts: http://jbp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://jbp.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://jbp.sagepub.com/content/34/4/452.refs.html

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

>> Version of Record - Oct 9, 2008 Proof - Jun 12, 2008 What is This?

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

A Validity Study of Scores on the Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory Based on a Sample of Black College Males
Malcolm H. Woodland University of California at Berkeley
In this study, factor analyses were used to examine the structural validity of scores on the Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory (PASCI) in a group of 222 Black college males. Definitions of self-concept and how self-concept has been operationalized in Black populations were also reviewed. Results from this study challenged the nine-factor PASCI model reported earlier and pointed out the importance of considering cultural differences during scale development. Exploratory factor analysis procedures suggested only five factors. In this five-factor model, the Math Ability and Social Acceptance items emerged relatively intact. In addition, new Physical Self-Concept and Global Self-Concept factors were also revealed. Suggestions for considering culture during scale development and item improvement are provided. Keywords: African American males; PASCI; self-concept; self-esteem

The self-concept of young adults has received considerable attention from contemporary researchers (Byrne, 1996; Hattie, 1992; Wylie, 1989). Scientists have established relationships between self-concept and many important quality-of-life variables such as academic achievement, depression, and suicide (Cornette, Abramson, & Bardone, 2000; Spurgeon & Myers, 2003). Available literature suggests that for Black males self-concept is uniquely important (Spurgeon & Myers, 2003). For years it was believed
AUTHORS NOTE: The author thanks the American Educational Research Association and the Institute for Educational Sciences for funding this research. Correspondence concerning this manuscript should be addressed to Malcolm H. Woodland, Graduate School of Education, University of California at Berkeley, 4427 Tolman Hall, Berkeley, CA 947201670; e-mail: mwoodland@berkeley.edu.
JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY, Vol. 34 No. 4, November 2008 452-478 DOI: 10.1177/0095798408316795 2008 The Association of Black Psychologists

452

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 453

that Black males, because of segregation and racism, suffered from diminished self-concept (K. Clark, 1955; Clark & Clark, 1950; Rosenberg, 1989). In fact, during the 1950s, data from Clark and Clarks seminal doll studies were used to inform the Supreme Courts decision to end segregation. Clark and Clark (1950) claimed that their studies indicated that segregation and other forms of racism damaged and lowered the self-concept of Black youth. Some researchers have suggested that this low self-concept among Black youth and particularly males results in Black self-hatred, which may cause poor grades, skin bleaching, Black-on-Black violence, and increases in suicide (Charles, 2003; Kirk & Zucker, 1979; Rercher, 1999). Other scholarship has since sharply criticized the self-hatred theory (Baldwin, 1979; M. Clark, 1982) and offered a more complex, systemic, and structural analysis of the experience of young Black males (Ferguson, 2000; Miller, 1996; Wilson, 1996); nevertheless, self-concept remains an integral component in every life stage for this group (Spurgeon & Myers, 2003). Although research has highlighted the importance of self-concept, relatively few studies have established the reliability and validity of selfconcept scores among Black populations. In this article, I briefly reviewed the history of self-concept scales, discussed self-concept in Black populations, and examined the factor structure of the Personal and Academic SelfConcept Inventory (PASCI) on a group of young Black males in college.
SELF-CONCEPT: A ONE- OR MULTIDIMENSIONAL CONSTRUCT?

Psychologists have examined self-concept and/or self-esteem since the inception of the discipline. Although researchers have attempted to distinguish between self-concept and self-esteem, none have found consistent empirical differences between the two (Bracken & Lamprecht, 2003; Brinthaupt & Erwin, 1992; Gray-Little & Hafdhal, 2000). Thus, in this study, as with most research, the terms self-concept and self-esteem are used interchangeably. Several promising self-concept or self-esteem measures exist in the research literature. Two of the more widely used measures, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES; Rosenberg, 1965, 1979) and the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS; Fitts, 1965; Roid & Fitts, 1988) were used as exemplars of the two most common ways that self-concept has been conceptualized. Some theorists conceptualize self-concept as a global or one-dimensional construct (Rosenberg, 1965, 1979; Soares & Soares, 1983), whereas others argue that self-concept is multidimensional with distinct measurable components (Roid & Fitts, 1988; Shavelson, Hubner, & Stanton, 1976). Rosenberg (1965) presented one of the initial arguments for the one-dimensional or global model of self-concept. He maintained that self-concept is a complex

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

454 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

organization of parts, pieces and components that construct ones global sense of self-worth or global self-concept (Rosenberg, 1979, p. 73). Although Rosenberg believed that global self-concept was an amalgamation of pieces, he saw those pieces as too complexly and obscurely related for an individual to be aware of and as a result unquantifiable by self-report (Byrne, 1996). The RSES was constructed based on the global or onedimensional model of self-concept and remains the most frequent quantitative operationalization of this construct since its publication (Byrne, 1996). Despite the RSESs popularity, severe criticism has been aimed at measuring self-concept one-dimensionally (Harter, 1990). Researchers suggested that the RSES and the other scales based on the one-dimensional model actually measured additional components of self-concept, but blurred them into a single factor, ultimately masking important differences in how individuals perceive themselves in varying aspects of their lives (Hensley & Roberts, 1976; Kaplan & Pokorny, 1969). In contrast to the one-dimensional model, construct validity research (Fleming & Whalen, 1990; Fitts, 1965; Roid & Fitts, 1988; Shavelson et al., 1976) has demonstrated that self-concept is a multidimensional construct and cannot be adequately understood unless its multidimensional structure is taken into account (Byrne, 1996, p. 13). Recent scholarship has suggested that self-concept is a collection of individuals self-perceptions in different areas of their lives. Researchers who support the multidimensional model argue that individuals have multiple self-concepts, such as an academic self-concept, which reflects their self-perceptions about their academic ability; a social self-concept, which reflects their self-perceptions about their social ability; a physical self-concept; and a variety of other self-concepts (Fleming &Whalen, 1990; Fitts, 1965; Roid & Fitts, 1988; Shavelson et al., 1976). The manner in which the different self-concepts are interrelated continues to be debated in the research literature (see Byrne, 1996, for a review). Byrne (1996) concluded that the Shavelson et al.s (1976) multidimensional model, which posits that the multiple self-concepts are interrelated in a hierarchy with global self-concept at the apex, has garnered more empirical support than the other theories. The PASCI (Fleming & Whalen, 1990) is one attempt to operationalize the Shavelson et al. (1976) theory. The TSCS (Fitts, 1965; Roid & Fitts, 1988) is one of the earliest and most widely used of the multidimensional self-concept measures (Byrne, 1996). The TSCS was developed using a 5 (external frame of reference) 3 (internal frame of reference) 2 (positive versus negatively worded items) facet design and measures multiple self-concepts, such as physical self-concept, moral self-concept, and social self-concept. The length and complex structure of this 100-item measure has received substantial criticism (Byrne,

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 455

1996). Although the TSCS continues to be improved on and has considerable implications for both clinicians and researchers, it is suggested for use with individuals 19 years and older. As a result, this measure lacks domains specifically relevant to young people, such as the parental relationship and academic self-concept. Although the RSES and the TSCS are the most used self-concept scales, researchers have questioned their factor structure, theoretical framework, and factor invariance across diverse socioeconomic, cultural, and racial groups (Byrne, 1996). In fact, the theory and structure of most one- and multidimensional self-concept scales were primarily based on the norms and scores of middle to upper class White populations (Byrne, 1996). Consequently, less is known about the structure of scores for other groups, including Black males.
SELF-CONCEPT RESEARCH AMONG BLACK POPULATIONS

In Old Myths Die Hard, Rosenberg (1989) highlighted the stubborn myth that Black youth suffer from low self-concept. Despite a preponderance of scientific evidence to the contrary (Baldwin, 1979; Gray-Little & Hafdhal, 2000; Rosenberg, 1989), the belief that Black youth have a diminished self-concept remains entrenched in popular discourse (Cosby & Poussaint, 2007; Kamau, 2007). In contrast, most contemporary research has indicated just the opposite: Black youth tend to have either equal or higher self-concept scores than youth from other racial/ethnic groups (Gray-Little & Hafdhal, 2000). Multiple theories have been advanced to explain the high self-concept scores among Black youth. For example, Hoelter (1982) hypothesized that Black youth have higher self-concepts as a result of placing greater emphasis on external affirmation and less reliance on internal standards, as compared with White youth. Similarly, McCarthy and Yancy (1971) posited that Black youth are protected from low self-concepts because they attribute their shortcomings and failures to the system, a recourse that White youth do not have. Recent examinations have refuted both theories by indicating that Black youth are not always more externally focused and no more likely to blame the system than other racial/ethnic groups (Gray-Little & Hafdhal, 2000; Jackson, 2007; van Laar, 2000). Graham (1994) also pointed out that these theories appear to stem from the belief that Black youth should suffer from low self-concept, an idea likely derived from previous research and popular discourse. Much of the early research and theorizing, which posited that Black youth suffered from decreased self-concept (Cartwright, 1950; K. Clark, 1955;

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

456 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

Clark & Clark, 1950; Gerth & Mills, 1953), has now been criticized for theoretical, methodological, and procedural flaws (Gray-Little & Hadfhal, 2000; Rosenberg, 1989). These flaws prompted Wylies (1979) contention that studies reporting lower Black self-esteem tend to be methodologically less adequate than those reporting them to have higher self-esteem (p. 182). Some researchers allege that self-concept differences among White, Black, and other racial groups are too complex to simply examine which racial group has a higher self-concept, but are instead indicative of cultural differences in the self-concept construct among diverse racial groups. Several scholars have drawn attention to the fact that early constructions of selfconcept were dominated by White scholars who conceptualized self-concept on the basis of a set of individualistic characteristics (Heine, Lehman, Markus, & Kitayama, 1999; Michaels, Barr, Roosa, & Knight, 2007). As a result, contemporary self-concept theory and measurement reflect feelings about individual status and the achievement of individual goals. Available evidence has demonstrated that self-concept for Blacks and other American minority groups may reflect collectivist rather than individualistic values (Hale, 1982; Trandis, 2001). For people of African descent, self-concept may be derived from the status of the group and the achievement of group goals. Some even contend that Black self-concept reflects a marriage between an individuals feelings about ones self and feelings about ones racial group (Sellers, Rowley, Chavous, Shelton, & Smith, 1997). These differences in collectivistic and individualistic notions of self-concept have led many to advocate for vastly different conceptions and measurement of self-concept for Whites, Blacks, and other American minority groups. Gray-Little and Hadfhal (2000) noted that another primary flaw in the Black self-concept literature is the lack of instrument standardization within Black populations. Researchers have also pointed out that even when Black populations and other ethnic minority groups are included in instrument standardization, they often make up only a small percentage of the sample (Cokley, Komarraju, King, Cunningham, & Muhammad, 2003). Collapsing small samples of ethnic minority participants into a substantially larger sample of Whites can obscure important ethnic differences in the structure of scores on a scale and the construct in general (Cokley et al., 2003). In this study, I addressed these concerns by using factor analysis to examine the structure of scores of a group of Black college males on a promising selfconcept measure called the PASCI (Fleming & Whalen, 1990).
THE PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC SELF-CONCEPT INVENTORY

The PASCI is a self-concept scale that integrates both one- and multidimensional models of self-concept. In contrast to the RSES and the TSCS,

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 457

this scale focuses on adolescents with factors that measure feelings about the parental relationship as well as academics. Fleming and Whalen (1990) developed the PASCI to operationalize the Shavelson et al. (1976) hierarchical multifaceted model (HMFM) of self-concept, which, as Byrne (1996) pointed out, has received more empirical support than other competing theories. According to HMFM, self-concept is both global and multidimensional. Shavelson et al. (1976) posited that global self-concept is at the apex of the construct but splits into two branches, academic and nonacademic self-concepts. They further noted that nonacademic self-concept comprises three branches: social, physical, and emotional self-concepts. Academic self-concept can also be differentiated into math self-concept, verbal self-concept, and other specified academic areas. Thus, in HMFM, when moving from the apex (global self-concept) to the base of the construct, the different facets of self-concept become increasingly differentiated. Shavelson et al.s (1976) ideas of global self-concept were consistent with Rosenbergs (1965) one-dimensional conceptualization; however, the HMFM also integrates multidimensionality. The PASCI was developed to measure these varying aspects of self-concept. Fleming and Whalen (1990) also claim that unlike the TSCS, which was constructed for adults, and the RSES, which lacks dimensionality, the PASCI is one of a mere few measures that provide a brief but reliable and valid instrument (for adolescents and young adults), with scales that would be relevant to counselors, teachers and the students they advise (p. 958).
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PASCI

The PASCI is an expanded version of Fleming and Courtneys (1984) Self-Rating Scales (SRS), which was based on both an earlier model of the SRS constructed by Fleming and Watts (1980) and the Feelings of Inadequacy Scale by Janis and Field (1959). Fleming and Watts (1980) developed the original SRS using principal components analysis to group the items. Principal components analysis yielded a three-factor, 28-item scale. These SRS factors were labeled as Social Confidence, School Abilities, and Self-Regard, which was a proxy for global self-concept, and closely mirrored the theoretical self-concept factors described by Shavelson et al. (1976). Subsequent theoretical and conceptual changes led to an expanded version of the SRS (Fleming & Courtney, 1984). In 1990, Fleming and Whalen expanded the SRS again to include Social Anxiety and Physical Ability factors. Moreover, the School Abilities and the Social Confidence factors listed on the original SRS were disaggregated into four factors. School Abilities was divided into Math Ability and Verbal

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

458 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

Ability, and Social Confidence was divided into Social Acceptance and Physical Appearance. This updated seven-factor scale was named the PASCI (Fleming & Whalen, 1990). Fleming and Whalen (1990) tested the fit of the seven-factor PASCI model on a multiracial group of college and high school students using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Based on Bentler and Bonetts (1980) normed fit index (NFI = .954), it was concluded that the seven-factor PASCI model with minor post hoc adjustments was the best fit. They also reported a correlation of .74 between the Self-Regard factor of the PASCI, which measures global self-concept, and the RSES, suggesting concurrent validity. Although 20% of the high school sample and 12% of the college sample in Fleming and Whalens (1990) study were Black, the reliability coefficients for the Black participants were not examined separately. Several scholars have contended that while including Black populations and other people of color into larger sample sizes of Whites is an accepted culturally sensitive practice, it is not methodologically sound because important group differences are masked into the structure of one nonmonolithic group (Cokley et al., 2003; Rouse & Cashin, 2000). As Matsumotos (1994) widely quoted statement posited, there is a good possibility that different cultures will produce different subscales on the same type of test, or that they will produce no interpretable subscales (p. 20). There have been subsequent modifications to the original seven-factor, 35item PASCI. Watkins, Akande, Cheng, and Regmi (1996) used a 40-item, eight-factor PASCI to examine differences in self-concept scores across diverse cultural groups. In addition to including a new Parental Acceptance factor, this was the first time that reliability estimates on the PASCI for nonAmerican White populations were published in the available literature. In Watkins et al. study, although the reliability coefficients remained high for the American White population, the reliabilities for group participants from Hong Kong, Nepal, and Nigeria ranged from .46 to .63. These low reliability estimates may be indicative of differences in the structure of scores and/or selfconcept in general among non-American White groups. These differences likely extend to Black populations in the United States as well. Nevertheless, Watkins et al. (1996) ignored the minimal scale reliability to conclude that their examination demonstrated significant culture-based differences in levels of self-concept for youth from the United States, Hong Kong, Nepal, and Nigeria. This finding must be interpreted carefully considering the low alpha coefficients for the non-White and American groups. The most recent version of the PASCI was used by Morrison (1998) in her dissertation study on the sexual health of Canadian undergraduates. This version of the PASCI consisted of nine factors containing 5 items each, for a total of 45 items. Both Watkins et al.s (1996) self-concept diversity study

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 459

and Morrisons (1998) dissertation study included the original seven factors constructed by Fleming and Whalen (1990); however, the Watkins et al. (1996) study included an additional 5-item factor labeled Parental Acceptance, and Morrison (1998) included both the Parental Acceptance factor as well as a 5-item general Academic Ability factor. Information on the psychometric properties of these additional factors was not available in the research literature. Sample items for all nine factors are listed in Table 1. The first seven factors include those developed by Fleming and Whalen (1990) and found in all subsequent versions of the PASCI. The eighth and ninth factors listed in Table 1 were used in studies by Watkins et al. (1996) and Morrison (1998).
PRESENT STUDY

This study used both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and CFA procedures to identify the PASCI factor structure in scores of Black college males. EFA finds the one underlying factor model that best fits the data, whereas CFA allows the researcher to impose a particular factor model on the data and then see how well that model explains responses (Bryant & Yarnold, 1995, p. 109). Although CFA was initially used to develop the PASCI, two problems occur when employing CFA during early instrument construction. First, CFA only reveals if the proposed structure of scores fits the data; however, it does not indicate if the hypothesized model is the best fit for the scores, unless one has plausible alternative models to test. Second, CFA is generally based on strong theoretical and empirical foundation (Stevens, 1996, p. 389). Although the PASCI has a strong theoretical base, there is little empirical evidence supporting the model. Additionally, the most recent versions of the instrument have additional subscales for which the factor structure has not been examined. The PASCI is not a new instrument, yet very little research has been published on the structural validity of this measure. Although the PASCI has been used internationally, translated into different languages, and used on several occasions to draw conclusions about gender and racial group differences (Morrison, 1998; Watkins et al., 1996; Woodland, 2005), no studies have examined the structural validity of the PASCI with a single gender or racially homogenous group. In Fleming and Whalens (1990) initial study, they did use a racially diverse group of high school and college students. However, as noted earlier in this study, assimilating a small sample of people of color into a substantially larger sample of Whites clouds possible differences among diverse groups. Given the limited empirical validation of the PASCI for non-American White groups and the

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

460 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

TABLE 1

PASCI Factors and Sample Items

Factor Self-Regard Social Acceptance Math Ability Verbal Ability Sample Item Most of the time, do you genuinely like yourself? How often do you feel concerned about what other people think of you? Do you often think of yourself as good at mathematical problems? Have you ever thought that you had a greater ability to read and absorb articles and textbooks than most people? Do you often wish or fantasize that you were better looking? Do you ever think of yourself as more athletic than most people? How often are you troubled with shyness? Do you often think your family holds you in high regard? Added in Watkins et al. (1996) and Morrison (1998). Do you think of yourself as an outstanding student? Added in Morrison (1998).

Physical Appearance Physical Ability Social Anxiety Parental Acceptance

Academic Ability

NOTE: PASCI = Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory.

importance of identifying valid measures of self-concept among young Black males, factor analyses were used to examine the structure and reliability of PASCI scores in a sample of Black college males. METHOD
PARTICIPANTS

Participants consisted of 222 Black males whose ages ranged from 18 to 27 years (mean [M] age = 20.05; standard deviation [SD] = 2.63). All were enrolled in two private historically Black universities in the midAtlantic and Southeastern regions of the United States. Approximately 85% of participants self-designated as African American, with 6% and 7% indicating African or Caribbean ethnic backgrounds, respectively. The remaining 3% indicated Latino or another ethnicity. The majority of participants (75%) reported that at least one parent had achieved an associates degree or higher.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 461

MEASURES

All participants completed a packet of measures that included the PASCI (Fleming & Whalen, 1990). The PASCI consists of 45 items that measure nine areas of self-concept: Self-Regard, Social Acceptance, Math Ability, Verbal Ability, Physical Appearance, Physical Ability, Social Anxiety, Parental Acceptance, and Academic Ability. Participants respond to each item on a 7-point Likert-type scale with labeled extremes of 1 (practically never) to 7 (very often). On the seven original subscales, Fleming and Whalen (1990) reported reliability estimates among a diverse college student sample ranging from .73 to .94. A correlation of .74 was reported between the RSES and the Self-Regard (global self-concept) subscale of the PASCI, suggesting concurrent validity. The Parental Acceptance and Academic Ability subscales were published in later work (Morrison, 1998; Watkins et al., 1996) and reliability estimates for these additional subscales were not provided.
PROCEDURE

Flyers were posted around the universities to announce the study, and the majority of participants were in introductory level courses. The project was described to potential participants, and they were informed that participation was optional. The institutional review boards at the participating institutions approved this study. RESULTS
PRELIMINARY ANALYSES

These data originally included 225 Black male college students; however, after excluding participants who had four or more missing values on the PASCI, 222 participants remained. Linear interpolation was used to replace scores for participants with three or less missing values. The item means ranged from 3.5 to 6.1, with standard deviations ranging from 1.0 to 2.3. The subscale means ranged from 19.9 to 28.2, and the medians ranged from 16 to 30 (see Table 2). Given the sample size, all correlations more than .15 were statistically significant. According to Cohen (1988), only correlations in the medium (r .3) to large (r .5) effect size range should be interpreted. As hypothesized by the scale authors (Fleming & Whalen, 1990) and HMFM theory (Shavelson et al., 1976), the various facets of self-concept do appear to be related causing most of the correlations to fall in the medium to large effect

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

462 TABLE 2 VAB PAB PAP SAX PAC SAC MDN M SD (.51) .422 .444 .459 .488 .460 (.70) .528 .380 .509 .370 (.67) .579 .508 .453 (.60) .489 .509 (.76) .496 (.86) 30 24 21 16 25 27 24 30 24 28.22 22.79 20.36 23.66 22.54 23.61 22.24 24.71 19.94 4.65 4.96 6.82 4.82 6.17 5.55 5.30 6.91 7.11

Descriptive Statistics of the PASCI (N = 222)

SRE

AAB

MAB

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

SRE AAB MAB VAB PAB PAP SAX PAC SAC

(.55) .448 .222 .511 .510 .651 .514 .566 .412

(.50) .389 .581 .374 .483 .435 .443 .477

(.81) .278 .236 .161 .100 .233 .153

NOTE: PASCI = Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory; SRE = self-regard; AAB = academic ability; MAB = math ability; VAB = verbal ability; PAB = physical ability; PAP = physical appearance; SAX = social anxiety; PAC = parental acceptance; SAC = social acceptance; MDN = median; M = mean; SD = standard deviation. The alpha coefficients are presented in parentheses on the diagonal and observed correlations are presented below the diagonal.

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 463

size range. The largest effect size of .65 occurred between Self-Regard and Physical Appearance. All correlations with Self-Regard, except for Math Ability, were in the medium to large effect size range. All Math Ability correlations fell below .28, suggesting that Math Ability has a unique relationship with the other facets of self-concept. Other large effect sizes were found in correlations between Academic Ability and Verbal Ability (.58), Physical Appearance and Physical Ability (.53), and Social Anxiety and Physical Appearance (.58). Other large effects sizes occurred between Parental Acceptance and both Physical Ability (.51) and Physical Appearance (.51) and between Social Acceptance and Social Anxiety (.51). Reliability estimates for the nine PASCI subscale scores were calculated using Cronbachs (1951) alpha; these coefficients can be seen in parentheses on the diagonal of Table 2. The reliability estimates for Self-Regard, Academic Ability, Verbal Ability, and Social Anxiety were all in the .60 or less range. The additional subscale estimates ranged from .67 to .86.
CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS

As indicated previously, CFAs are most appropriate for assessing factor structures that are supported by sound theory and empirical research (Byrne, 2006; Thompson, 2004). CFA is also a particularly useful tool for testing alternative models (MacCallum, Wegener, Uchino, & Fabrigar, 1993). Although only one published study has supported the hypothesized factor structure of the PASCI (Fleming & Whalen, 1990), I used CFA to test the fit of that nine-factor PASCI model on responses from Black college males. I also tested the fit of the Shavelson et al. (1976) second-order model with global self-concept at the apex. Various criteria were used to assess goodness of fit. These included the Satorra-Bentler scaled chi square (Satorra & Bentler, 1994), which corrects for nonnormality in the data; the chi square to degrees of freedom ratio; the comparative fit index (CFI), which accounts for sample size; the nonnormed fit index (NNFI), which takes model complexity into account; and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), as well as a 90% confidence interval for RMSEA values. Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and Black (1995) suggested that a chi square to degrees of freedom ratio between 1 and 2 indicates acceptable fit. NNFI and CFI values at or above .95 (Hu & Bentler, 1998) and RMSEA values of less than .05 (Byrne, 2006; MacCallum, Browne, & Sugawara, 1996) are also indicators of acceptable fit. Maximum likelihood extraction procedures were used to analyze the covariance matrices based on a raw scores using Analysis of Moment Structures version 7.0 (AMOS 7.0; Arbuckle, 2006). The latent variables were scaled as follows: A single

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

464 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

TABLE 3

Fit Indices for the PASCI Derived From Confirmatory Factor Analyses (Maximum Likelihood Robust)
Model 1. Null 2. First-order, nine-factor 3. Second-order

2s-b
6237.76* 3038.82* 3367.21*

df 990 909 945

2/df
6.3 3.3 3.6

NNFI

CFI

RMSEA

90% CI

.56 .52

.59 .53

.103 .108

.099-.107 .104-.112

NOTE: N = 222. PASCI = Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory; s-b = SatorraBentler; NNFI = nonnormed fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; CI = confidence interval. *p < .001.

indicator for the first-order factors was set at unity, and the variance of the second-order model was also set at unity. Two models were examined using the 45 PASCI items. The fit results are shown in Table 3. Model 2 was the nine-factor, first-order, correlated structure posed by Fleming and Whalen (1990). Model 3 was the second-order structure with global self-concept at the apex. CFA indicates that both models did not fit these data. The nine-factor, first-order model (Model 2) had a 2/df ratio of 3.3 and both NNFI and CFI values were below .6. The RMSEA value was .103 with a 90% confidence interval ranging from .099 to .107. The second-order model (Model 3) had a slightly poorer fit. The 2/df ratio was 3.6 and the NNFI and CFI values were both below .53. The RMSEA value was also a little higher at .108 with a 90% confidence interval ranging from .104 to .112. Both models were rejected.
EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS

The PASCI model proposed by Fleming and Whalen (1990) did not fit these data. Consequently, EFA was performed as a post hoc analysis to identify the underlying structure of scores for this group of Black college males. As stated previously, EFA is of particular value when attempting to find the best fit for scores on an instrument. I used EFA with principal axis extraction to examine the factor structure of PASCI scores. Bartletts (1954) test of sphericity was significant, 2(990) = 5790.86, p < .001, and Kaisers (1974) measure of sampling adequacy was .86, indicating that the correlation matrix of PASCI scores was factorable (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Although there are several rules of thumb to determine sample size for factor analysis (Comrey & Lee, 1992; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007), many suggest that examining communality estimates is an appropriate method for

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 465

determining sample size (MacCallum, Widaman, Zhang, & Hong, 1999). In this study, communality estimates were wide, ranging from .169 to .742, and the variable to factor ratio was approximately 20:3, indicating that a sample size of at least 200 would result in an admissible and convergent solution (MacCallum et al., 1999). Given the high intercorrelations and the complexity among PASCI subscales, oblique and orthogonal rotations were conducted. The factor loadings on the pattern and structure matrices from the oblique rotation and the pattern/structure matrix from the orthogonal rotation were all similar. EFAs were also conducted on these data without the additional factors included by Watkins et al. (1996) and Morrison (1998), but these analyses resulted in structures that were uninterpretable. Decision criteria. Based on Thompson and Daniels (1996) recommendation, multiple criteria were used to determine the number of factors to extract, including the eigenvalue rule (11 factors), the scree test (5 factors), parallel analysis (5 factors; Lautenschlager, 1989), and the underlying theory (9 factors). Using Tabachnick and Fidells (2007) suggestion, a coefficient of .4, indicating at least 16% shared variance, was used for establishing salience of items on a factor. Because the scree test and parallel analysis are generally more accurate than the eigenvalue rule (Comrey, 1988; Floyd & Widaman, 1995; Thompson & Daniel, 1996), and because the PASCI is based on a 9-factor structure, 5- through 9-factor models were extracted. I examined the 5-factor model first, because both the scree test and parallel analysis suggested this structure. Five-factor model. The five-factor model, which is shown in Table 4, accounted for 52.2% of the variance in the scores. Forty-two of the 45 items obtained salient coefficients; however, several items were complex (i.e., had salient coefficients on more than one factor) and most items did not emerge on the appropriate factors. The reliability coefficients for the four factors that were labeled on the five-factor model were Global Self-Concept (.83), Math Self-Concept (.91), Physical Self-Concept (.77), and Social Self-Concept (.70). Factor I of the five-factor model was left Untitled and consisted of negatively worded items from all the subscales. Given the noninterpretable loadings of all the negatively worded items from the nine subscales and the tendency of negatively worded items to form factors based on distribution shape, Factor I is likely an artifact. Factor II was labeled Global Self-Concept. The original hypothesized Self-Regard subscale, which measured global selfconcept, partially emerged as Factor II with four of the five Self-Regard

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

466 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

TABLE 4

PASCI Structure Coefficients From Principal Axis Extraction and Varimax Rotation
Factor 1, Untitled Untitled PAC45 PAB18 SRE14 PAC43 AAB7 PAP25 PAP5 VAB11 PAB21 SAX32 SAC12 SAC24 VAB34 PAC41 MAB36 SAX3 SAX33 Global SelfConcept AAB19 PAC44 SRE16 SRE37 SRE8 PAC42 SRE13 VAB39 PAP9 VAB35 SAX23 AAB1 Math SelfConcept MAB17 MAB15 MAB4 MAB40 Factor 2, Global Self-Concept Factor 3, Math Self-Concept Factor 4, Physical Self-Concept Factor 5, Social Self-Concept .056 .047 .052 .015 .110 .252 .188 .082 .037 .204 .510 .488 .104 .159 .009 .339 .349

h2

.856 .809 .783 .769 .766 .734 .709 .700 .696 .694 .652 .650 .647 .610 .536 .443 .400

.074 .102 .092 .080 .073 .148 .151 .006 .081 .086 .044 .139 .031 .055 .015 .204 .137

.021 .072 .029 .019 .036 .048 .017 .030 .078 .021 .021 .025 .086 .083 .125 .083 .091

.030 .022 .038 .052 .010 .033 .006 .005 .077 .060 .040 .005 .009 .124 .022 .021 .049 .064 .125 .338 .216 .117 .009 .224 .098 .446 .113 .278 .127

.742 .673 .626 .601 .605 .627 .561 .498 .504 .535 .689 .681 .438 .423 .304 .360 .311

.176 .184 .037 .067 .124 .206 .014 .063 .075 .128 .080 .078

.589 .580 .571 .571 .551 .548 .502 .500 .490 .450 .441 .400

.348 .096 .081 .044 .078 .059 .062 .017 .043 .091 .041 .347

.038 .122 .015 .040 .052 .064 .047 .166 .145 .014 .034 .137

.505 .681 .449 .381 .353 .350 .308 .291 .467 .240 .281 .321

.055 .071 .016 .071

.145 .113 .01 .101

.876 .874 .846 .719

.030 .086 .061 .020

.046 .044 .056 .060

.794 .792 .723 .537 (continued)

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 467

TABLE 4 (continued) Factor 2, Factor 3, Factor 4, Factor 5, Factor 1, Global Math Physical Social Untitled Self-Concept Self-Concept Self-Concept Self-Concept Physical SelfConcept PAB27 PAB30 PAB6 PAP29 PAP22 Social SelfConcept SAC20 SAC2 AAB28 SAC31 Nonsalient Items AAB38 SAN26 VAB10 Eigenvalue Percentage Variance

h2

.177 .134 .011 .052 .016

.272 .208 .035 .400 .427

.095 .067 .075 .008 .009 .032 .016 .108 .023

.728 .628 .609 .504 .483

.052 .007 .012 .148 .144

.647 .460 .379 .439 .436

.525 .158 .013 .450

.040 .119 .021 .007

.058 .039 .051 .073

.604 .535 .510 .488

.646 .327 .276 .447

.177 .001 .041 10.61 23.60

.078 .358 .328 5.54 12.31

.103 .010 .219 3.2 7.11

.061 .254 .019 2.1 4.87

.342 .078 .198 1.96 4.34

.169 .199 .197

NOTE: PASCI = Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory; SRE = self-regard; AAB = academic ability; MAB = math ability; VAB = verbal ability; PAB = physical ability; PAP = physical appearance; SAX = social anxiety; PAC = parental acceptance; SAC = social acceptance; h2 refers to the extraction communality estimates. Salient loadings are bolded and italicized.

(SRE) items (16, 37, 8, 13) obtaining salient coefficients. Item SRE 14, the only reversed scored Self-Regard item, loaded on Factor I with the other negatively worded items. In addition to Self-Regard items, items from five other factors loaded on Factor II. Still, all the Factor II items appeared to measure global self-concept. For example, two of the items that form Factor II are Physical Appearance 9 (PAP 9) and Parental Acceptance 42 (PAC 42). PAP 9 asks, Do you think you are quite physically attractive? This question appears to measure both global self-concept as well as self-perception in relation to appearance. Similarly, PAC 42 asks, Do you think that your family holds you in high regard? This item also appears to measure feelings of both global self-concept and parental acceptance. Factor III was labeled Math Self-Concept. Four of the five Math Ability (MAB) items loaded on Factor III. Only the reversed scored MAB item 36

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

468 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

did not obtain a salient coefficient on Factor III, instead loading on Factor I with the other reversed scored items. Factor IV was labeled Physical SelfConcept. Three of original Physical Ability items (PAB; 27, 30, 6) and three Physical Appearance items (29, 22, 9) obtained salient coefficients on this factor. These items explored self-perceptions of physical appearance and/or ability with questions such as are you proud or pleased with your physical appearance and ability? Although these items probed ideas about physical appearance and/or ability, all the Physical Appearance items were complex. The Physical Appearance items obtained salient coefficients on Factors II and IV, suggesting that these items also contribute to an individuals global self-concept. The Physical Ability items did not cross-load and anchored Factor IVs Physical Self-Concept label. Factor V was labeled Social Self-Concept. The five original Social Acceptance items were the only group of questions that all achieved salient loadings on the same factor (Factor V); however, four of those five items were reversed scored and also emerged on Factor I with the other reversed scored items. Academic Ability Item 28 (AAB 28) also obtained a salient coefficient on Factor V. Factor V appeared to measure both social acceptance (SAC) and anxiety. For example, Social Acceptance Item 2 asks, How much do you worry about whether other people will regard you as a success or failure in your job or in school? Similarly, Academic Ability Item 28 asks, Are you often concerned that your school performance is not up to par? The words worry and concern, which are key anxiety-related terms, likely gauge ones anxiety in addition to feelings of social acceptance and academic ability. Because this factor appeared to measure both ones feelings of acceptance and anxiety in social and academic situations, it was labeled Social Self-Concept. Three items did not obtain salient coefficients on any factor: Social Anxiety Item 26, Verbal Ability (VAB) Item 10, and Academic Ability Item 38. Six- to nine-factor models. The other models (six, seven, eight, nine factors) closely resembled the structure of the five-factor model. The sixthrough nine-factor models accounted for 55.5% to 64.1% of the variance in scores, respectively. All five- through nine-factor models consisted of three similar components: (a) Factor I included all reversed scored items, (b) only the Social Acceptance factor emerged with all the theorized items on the same factor, and (c) the Math Ability factor partially emerged. The five- and six-factor models were very similar. The only two differences were that in the six-factor model Factor IV was Social Self-Concept and Factor V consisted of Physical Ability items. Also, in this six-factor model, the Physical Appearance items only clustered along Factor II and did

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 469

not create a new Physical Self-Concept construct. Factor VI consisted of three items, two Verbal Ability items (VAB 10, 39) and one Academic Ability item (AAB 19). These three items explore ones ability to absorb articles and complete both normal and standardized exams. Available research indicates that at least four items are needed to create a common factor with considerable certainty (Fabrigar, Wegener, MacCallum, & Strahan, 1999); thus, factors with three or less items including Factor VI should not, in most cases, be interpreted. The first six factors in the seven-, eight-, and nine-factor models were the same as those reported in the six-factor model. In the additional structures, two items or less had salient coefficients on factors seven, eight, and nine. These factors were not interpreted. The five-factor model appeared most interpretable, in spite of the artifactual Factor I, and was selected for further examination. The relative psychometric weaknesses of each of the models (i.e., complex items, nonsalient loadings, poor factor structure) suggest that additional work must be done on the scale. The models are discussed in the next section. DISCUSSION In this study, I examined the structural validity of PASCI scores in a sample of Black male college students. Consistent with HMFM theory, which suggests that the varying branches of self-concept are interrelated, several of the PASCI subscales were correlated (Shavelson et al., 1976). The largest correlation was between Self-Regard (the PASCIs global self-concept subscale) and Physical Appearance, a relationship demonstrated in the original PASCI study (Fleming & Whalen, 1990) and replicated in diverse samples within the research literature (Rosen & Ross, 1968; Smith, Burlew, & Lundgren, 1991). Numerous studies indicate that self-perceptions regarding physical appearance are one of the largest contributors to global self-concept in adolescence and early adulthood (Harter, 1990; Pliner, Chaiken, & Flett, 1990). Self-Regard also had quite a few correlations with the other subscales that were in the medium to large effect size range (Cohen, 1988); a finding also consistent with HMFM theory (Shavelson et al., 1976), which claims that Self-Regard is at the apex of the varying self-concepts. Math Ability was the only construct that had consistently low correlations with the other subscales, suggesting that Math Ability is unique from other self-concepts, a finding also confirmed within the research literature (Byrne, 1996). Although the correlation matrix in this study was consistent with HMFM theory and fairly similar to correlations found in the original PASCI study (Fleming & Whalen, 1990), many of the subscale reliabilities were very low.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

470 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

In particular, the Self-Regard, Academic Ability, Verbal Ability, and Social Anxiety scales all had reliabilities between .5 and .6. Only the Math Ability and Social Acceptance scales had reliability coefficients at or above .8. Similarly, CFA revealed that both the Shavelson et al. (1976) second-order model and the nine-factor PASCI model (Fleming & Whalen, 1990) did not fit these data. The low reliability coefficients and lack of fit of the nine-factor model found in this study were in stark contrast to findings reported by Fleming and Whalen (1990). This studys findings were instead consistent with the low reliability estimates found on the PASCI with other non-White populations (Watkins et al., 1996). The low reliability estimates and lack of factor invariance on the PASCI are likely indicative of structural differences in self-concept among diverse racial groups and in this case Black men. It is beyond the purview of this study to indicate whether the PASCI is not working primarily because of cultural differences in self-concept (e.g., individualistic vs. collectivistic) or psychometric problems with item development. However, I hypothesize that the PASCIs inability to work with this sample of Black males and other non-White racial/cultural groups (Watkins et al., 1996) is due to both the scales omission of the important role of cultural differences in self-concept and how these differences can affect measurement at the item level. Several scholars have highlighted the unique cultural differences in selfconcept among Black Americans. Some of these differences include a collectivist orientation, variations in internal versus external attributions, and the salience of racial/ethnic identity in the development of self-perceptions (Gray-Little & Hafdahl, 2000; Hale, 1982; Trandis, 2001; van Laar, 2000). Accounting for these cultural differences during item selection and other early phases of scale development is critical. Furthermore, as many methodologists have pointed out, collapsing small numbers of ethnic minority participants into a larger sample of Whites does not account for these cultural differences and is generally a flawed method for cross-cultural scale development (Cokley et al., 2003; Michaels et al., 2007; Rouse & Cashin, 2000). After reliability coefficients and CFA revealed the lack of fit by both the nine-factor and second-order models, EFA revealed a five-factor model was the best fit for these data. The first of these five factors consisted of a noninterpretable spread of negatively worded items from all the subscales and thus appeared to be an artifact. Factor II was labeled Global Self-Concept and integrated four of the five self-regard items as well as several items from other subscales. Factor II appears to be the global measure that Rosenberg (1965) and Shavelson et al. (1976) theorized. Yet, in contrast to solely self-regard items, Factor II includes items from the Academic

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 471

Ability, Parental Acceptance, Verbal Ability, Physical Appearance, and Social Anxiety subscales. This mix of subscale items may reflect the complex interaction of parts, pieces and components, which, according to Rosenberg (1979, p. 73), constructs ones global self-concept. Only three other factors partially emerged during EFA: Math SelfConcept, Physical Self-Concept, and Social Self-Concept. Although the Math Self-Concept items were the same as those in the Math Ability factor reported by Fleming and Whalen (1990), the Physical Self-Concept and Social Self-Concept factors contained items from varying subscales. The Physical Self-Concept factor integrated Physical Ability and Physical appearance items. The relationship between physical ability and selfappearance ratings not only makes conceptual sense but is also a relationship that is underscored in the research literature (Pliner et al., 1990). The Social Self-Concept subscale measured both feelings of anxiety and social acceptance. Each of the original Social Acceptance items, which after EFA all loaded on the Social Self-Concept subscale, contained the terms worry or concern in the context of feelings during social situations. As suggested previously, worry and concern are anxiety-related terms. In earlier versions of the PASCI, the hypothesized Social Anxiety and Social Acceptance subscales were condensed into one factor labeled Social Confidence (Fleming & Watts, 1980). Subsequent examinations led to the development of these two purportedly autonomous subscales. In this sample of Black college males, the original Social Anxiety items did not measure a coherent construct, nor did they coalesce with the anxiety aspects of the Social Acceptance items to create a Social Self-Concept factor similar to the Social Confidence factor found in earlier investigations (Fleming & Watts, 1980). Even though the Social Anxiety items yielded an alpha coefficient of .6, the Social Anxiety factor did not emerge in this sample. This construct difference was likely due to the ambiguity of the Social Anxiety items. On closer investigation, these items not only appeared to measure feelings of anxiety but also seemed to measure self-regard or global self-concept. Social Anxiety (SAX) Item 23, which achieved a salient loading on Global Self-Concept Factor II (r = .44), provides an example of this overlap. SAX 23 asks, Do you usually feel comfortable and at ease meeting new people? This item, while measuring feelings of social anxiety, also seems to measure global self-concept. This lack of construct clarity in the Social Anxiety items may be one reason why the factor did not emerge. In addition to Social Anxiety, a few other factors completely collapsed. The Verbal Ability, Academic Ability, and Parental Acceptance items were scattered across varying factors. The content of these particular subscale

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

472 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

items appeared to measure the desired construct; however, as Worrell, Cross, and Vandiver (2001) reminded us, often items that, on paper, seem to capture the essence of the construct do not result in scores that are reliable (p. 203) or valid. Worrell et al. (2001) also highlighted the importance of time in scale development. That is, it takes a tremendous amount of time to develop valid scales. Although the subscales proposed by Fleming and Whalen (1990) and the later subscales added in studies by Watkins et al. (1996) and Morrison (1998) were conceptualized within the parameters of the wellsupported HMFM theory (Shavelson et al., 1976), the additional subscales and even the original ones may not have undergone the time-consuming process it takes to yield reliable and valid items. I contend that this timeconsuming scale development process that Worrell et al. (2001) describe should not only be used to address purely psychometric concerns but to also address cultural differences that cause constructs such as self-concept to be dissimilar across diverse racial/ethnic groups. In sum, the theory of the PASCI (Fleming & Whalen, 1990) fits well within HMFM (Shavelson et al., 1976); however, additional scale development work is called for at the item and perhaps the theoretical level. Item wise, it is unclear what the PASCI is measuring in this group of young Black men. For instance, as a result of the multiple complex items, it is difficult to delineate if the Physical Appearance items are actually measuring self-perceptions of physical appearance, physical ability, or global selfconcept. It is equally difficult to interpret the seemingly random spread of items from the Verbal Ability, Parental Acceptance, and Academic Ability subscales. At the theory level, the PASCI authors and other researchers developing scales for cross-cultural research must use theory that critically engages gender, economic class, and, in this case, cultural differences. It is suggested that the PASCI authors attend to cultural differences in self-concept and attempt to create a parsimonious set of items by piloting items with different groups (e.g., Black females, White males). Scores should then be examined for structural validity and internal consistency using EFA. The final items selected should create discrete factors with strong alpha reliabilities and consist of factor loadings well above the suggested .4 coefficient (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007), as we know the possibility for error increases in scale use with standard community populations. Finally, CFA should then be used as a method of testing factor invariance among diverse cultural groups.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 473

LIMITATIONS There were limitations with this study and a few that were the result of limitations in earlier PASCI studies. For instance, the scale authors, Fleming and Whalen (1990), only included seven factors on the original PASCI; however, additional publications using the scale (Morrison, 1998; Watkins et al., 1996) included two additional factors (Parental Acceptance and Academic Ability) that were not part of the original scale. The psychometric properties for these additional factors were not published and the process through which these new factors became a part of the PASCI is unclear. In this study, these two factors had low reliabilities and did not emerge after a post hoc EFA. As suggested earlier in this work, another limitation of the previous study was the sole use of CFA to test the seven-factor model. It is suggested that the authors should have used EFA during early instrument construction. I was interested in understanding the simple structure underlying PASCI scores in a group of Black males; therefore, I used principal axis extraction, which maximizes orthogonal variance, and varimax rotation, which minimizes factor complexity (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007) and generally yields simple structure (Thompson, 2004). As the results indicate, and as Thompson noted, if the factors that are found are interpretable, the correct rotation method has typically been identified (p. 48). One limitation of this study in particular was the sole use of college students. The varying components of self-concept and particularly academic self-concept may develop differently for college students as opposed to a general community sample. Evidence already exists that there are some differences in academic self-concept between Black students who attend historically Black colleges/universities and those who attend predominantly White institutions (Cokley, 2000). These and other self-concept differences may be more robust between college students and those who do not attend college. CONCLUSIONS In this study, I examined the structural validity of PASCI scores in a sample of Black college males. Results indicated a lack of support for the nine-factor model. Instead, these results indicated a five-factor structure. Limitations withstanding, this study has made several contributions to the literature. These findings add to a growing body of research (Cokley et al., 2003; Michaels et al., 2007; Rouse & Cashin, 2000) which highlights the importance of recognizing cultural differences in self-concept and using

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

474 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

same gender, mixed gender, and culturally and racially homogenous groups during scale development. These findings also underscore the importance of using EFA during the early scale development phase to ensure which items result in the best fit for varying groups. This study also provides an examination of the reliability and structural validity of the PASCI, a scale that has been used to draw conclusions about youth of African descent and other diverse cultural groups (Morrison, 1998; Watkins et al., 1996; Woodland, 2005). The PASCI with its brief, multidimensional, and global format is theoretically and conceptually important. As Worrell et al. (2001) observed, developing valid instruments is one of the most critical issues faced by psychologists. In particular, developing reliable and culturally appropriate selfconcept measures for young Black males, whose self-concept has been the subject of heightened concern among teachers, scholars, and practitioners, is even more critical. Nonetheless, the PASCI, in its present state, is in need of additional psychometric and theoretical work before researchers and practitioners can know confidently what they are measuring. REFERENCES
Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). AMOS 7.0 users guide. Spring House, PA: AMOS Development Corporation. Baldwin, J. A. (1979). Theory and research concerning the notion of Black self-hatred: A review and reinterpretation. Journal of Black Psychology, 5, 51-77. Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi-square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 16, 296-298. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606. Bracken, B. A., & Lamprecht, M. S. (2003). Positive self-concept: An equal opportunity construct. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 103-121. Brinthaupt, T. M., & Erwin, L. J. (1992). Reporting about the self: Issues and implications. In T. M. Brinthaupt & R. P. Lipka (Eds.), The self: Definitional and methodological issues (pp. 137-171). New York: State University Press. Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 99-136). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Byrne, B. M. (1996). Measuring self-concept across the life span: Issues and instrumentation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cartwright, D. (1950). Emotional dimensions of group life. In M. L. Reymert (Ed.), Feelings and emotions (pp. 437-447). New York: McGraw-Hill. Charles, C. A. D. (2003). Skin bleaching, self-hate and Black identity in Jamaica. Journal of Black Studies, 33, 711-738. Clark, K. B. (1955). Prejudice and your child. Boston: Beacon Press.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 475

Clark, K. B., & Clark, M. P. (1950). The Negro child in the American social order. Journal of Negro Education, 19, 341-350. Clark, M. (1982). Racial group concept and self-esteem in Black children. Journal of Black Psychology, 8, 75-88. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power and analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cokley, K. (2000). An investigation of academic self-concept and its relationship to academic achievement in African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 26, 139-153. Cokley, K., Komarraju, M., King, A., Cunningham, D., & Muhammad, G. (2003). Ethnic differences in the measurement of academic self-concept in a sample of African American and European American college students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 707-722. Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 754-761. Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cornette, M. M., Abramson, L. Y., & Bardone, A. M. (2000). Toward an integrated theory of suicidal behaviors: Merging hopelessness, self-discrepancy and escape theories. In T. Jonier & D. Rudd (Eds.), Suicide, science: Expanding the boundaries (pp. 43-66). New York: Kluwer Academic Plenum. Cosby, W., & Poussaint, A. F. (2007). Blacks must drop victimhood and reclaim dignity. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved December 12, 2007, from www.csmonitor.com/2007/ 1108/ps09s01-coop.htm. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychological Bulletin, 16, 297-334. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272-299. Ferguson, A. A. (2000) Bad boys: Public schools in the making of Black masculinity. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Fitts, W. H. (1965). Tennessee Self-Concept Scale: Manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services. Fleming, J. S., & Courtney, B. E. (1984). The dimensionality of self-esteem: Hierarchical facet model for revised measurement scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 404-421. Fleming, J. S., & Watts, W. A. (1980). The dimensionality of self-esteem: Some results for a college sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 921-929. Fleming J. S., & Whalen, D. J. (1990). The Personal and Academic Self-Concept Inventory: Factor structure and gender differences in high school and college samples. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 957-967. Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7, 286-299. Gerth, H., & Mills, C. W. (1953). Character and social structure: The psychology of institutions. New York: Harcourt Brace. Graham, S. (1994). Motivation in African Americans. Review of Educational Research, 64, 55-117. Gray-Little, B., & Hafdhal, A. R. (2000). Factors influencing racial comparisons of selfesteem: A quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 26-54. Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis with readings (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hale, J. E. (1982). Black children: Their roots, culture and learning styles. New York: Pantheon.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

476 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

Harter, S. (1990). Process underlying adolescent self-concept formation. In R. Montemayor, G. R. Adams, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), From childhood to adolescence: A transitional period? (pp. 205-239). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hattie, J. (1992). Self-concept. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Heine, S. J., Lehman, D. R., Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1999). Is there a universal need for positive regard? Psychological Review, 106, 766-794. Hensley, W. E., & Roberts, M. K. (1976). Dimensions of Rosenbergs Scale of Self-Esteem. Psychological Reports, 38, 583-584. Hoelter, J. W. (1982). Race differences in selective credulity and self-esteem. Sociological Quarterly, 23, 527-537. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453. Jackson, J. J. (2007). Disaggregating race and ethnicity in behavioral and social science research. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. Janis, I. L., & Field, P. B. (1959). Sex differences and factors related to persuasibility. In C. I. Hovland & I. L. Janis (Eds.), Personality and persuasibility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36. Kamau, P. (2007). Help Black women find self-esteem. Denver Post. Retrieved December 12, 2007, from www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_4296846. Kaplan, H. B., & Pokorny, A. D. (1969). Self-derogation and psychosocial adjustment. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 149, 421-434. Kirk, A. R., & Zucker, R. A. (1979). Some psychological factors in attempted suicide among urban Black males. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior, 9, 76-86. Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989). A comparison of alternatives to conducting Monte Carlo analyses for determining parallel analysis criteria. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 365-395. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149. MacCallum, R. C., Wegener, D. T., Uchino, B. N., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1993). The problem of equivalent models in applications of covariance structure analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 185-199. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84-99. Matsumoto, D. (1994). Cultural influences on research methods and statistics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. McCarthy, J. D., & Yancey, W. L. (1971). Uncle Tom and Charlie: Metaphysical pathos in the study of racism and person disorganization. American Journal of Sociology, 7, 648-672. Michaels, M. L., Barr, A., Roosa, M. W., & Knight, G. P. (2007). Assessing measurement equivalence in a multiethnic sample of youth. Journal of Early Adolescence, 27, 269-295. Miller, J. (1996). Search and destroy: African American males in the criminal justice system. New York: Cambridge University Press. Morrison, J. K. (1998). Correlates and predictors of safer sexual behavior among Canadian undergraduate university students. Dissertation Abstracts International, Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 59 (1-A), 0103. Pliner, P., Chaiken, S., & Flet, G. L. (1990). Gender differences in concern with body weight and physical appearance over the life span. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 263-273.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

Woodland / PASCI SCORES AMONG BLACK COLLEGE MALES 477

Rercher, S. (1999). Differences in self image and the individual. The Psychologist, 12, 131-133. Roid, G. H., & Fitts, W. H. (1988). Tennessee Self-Concept Scale: Revised manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services. Rosen, G. M., & Ross, A. O. (1968). Relationship of body image to self-concept. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32, 100-112. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books. Rosenberg, M. (1989). Old myths die hard: The case of Black self-esteem. Revue Internationale de Psycholgie Sociale, 2, 355-365. Rouse, K. A. G., & Cashin, S. E. (2000). Assessment of academic self-concept and motivation: Results from three ethnic groups. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 91-102. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors on covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis (pp. 399-419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sellers, R. M., Rowley, S. A. J., Chavous, T. M., Shelton, J. N., & Smith, M. A. (1997). A multidimensional inventory of Black identity: A preliminary investigation of reliability and construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 805-815. Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. G. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441. Smith, L. R., Burlew, A. K., & Lundgren, D. C. (1991). Black consciousness, self-esteem, and satisfaction with physical appearance among African American female college students. Journal of Black Studies, 22, 269-283. Soares, L. M., & Soares, A. T. (1983). Components of students self-related cognitions. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco. Spurgeon, S. L., & Myers J. E. (2003). Understanding and enhancing self-esteem in AfricanAmerican males: Benefits of a wellness perspective. Retrieved July 24, 2007, from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/e6/b5.pdf (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED474677) Stevens, J. (1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Thompson, B., & Daniel, L. G. (1996). Factor analytic evidence for the construct validity of scores: A historical overview and some guidelines. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 197-208. Trandis, H. C. (2001). Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality, 69, 907-924. van Laar, C. (2000). The paradox of low academic achievement but high self-esteem in African American students: An attributional account. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 33-61. Watkins, D., Akande, A., Cheng, C., & Regmi, M. (1996). Culture and gender differences in the self-esteem of college students: A four-country comparison. Social Behavior and Personality, 24, 321-328. Wilson, J. (1996). When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York: Random House.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011

478 JOURNAL OF BLACK PSYCHOLOGY / NOVEMBER 2008

Woodland, M. H. (2005). Ethno-cultural exposure as a predictor of academic achievement, academic self-concept and self-reliance in Black college males. Dissertation Abstracts International, Section B: Humanities and Social Sciences, 65 (9-B), 4857. Worrell, F. C., Cross, W. E., Jr., & Vandiver, B. J. (2001). Nigrescence theory: Current status and challenges for the future. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29, 201-213. Wylie, R. C. (1979). The self-concept: Vol. 2. Theory and research on selected topics. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Wylie, R. C. (1989). Measures of self-concept. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Downloaded from jbp.sagepub.com by guest on November 3, 2011