The Youth Engagement with Global Sustainability Inventory (YEGSI): development and validity-based studies ( Inventario de Compromiso Juvenil con la Sostenibilidad: estudios de desarrollo y validez )

Abstract

Spanish

The construct of engagement has great potential for understanding adolescents’ subjective connection to/identification with global sustainability issues. However, there are currently no validated instruments for measuring young people’s engagement with global sustainability from a multidimensional psychological perspective. This study presents the Youth Engagement with Global Sustainability Inventory (YEGSI) and an assessment of its psychometric properties using a sample of 692 adolescents. An exploratory factor analysis using a random half of the sample (n = 341) revealed five dimensions: cognitive, emotional, behavioural, school, and family. A confirmatory factor analysis using the remaining participants (n = 351) supported modelling these factors as a correlated five-factor model. All five subscales had good reliability. Positive correlations between YEGSI dimensions and wellbeing were identified, indicating the scale had convergent validity. In sum, the YEGSI appeared to be a valid and reliable measure. This measure has the potential to develop research and practice in the domain of engagement with sustainability.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alisat

Riemer

(2015). The environmental action scale: Development and psychometric evaluation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.05.006

Appleton

J. J.

Christenson

S. L.

Kim

Reschly

A. L.

(2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002

Borojevic

Petrovic

Vuk

(2014). Youth and environmental education for sustainable development. International Journal of Science and Research, 3(9), 57–62.

Browne

M. W.

Cudeck

(1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005

Clayton

(2003) . Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. In S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Eds.), Identity and the natural environment. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3644.001.0001

Dunn

T. J.

Baguley

Brunsden

(2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046

Eignor

D. R.

(2013). The standards for educational and psychological testing. In K. F. Geisinger, B. A. Bracken, J. F. Carlson, J.-I. C. Hansen, N. R. Kuncel, S. P. Reise, & M. C. Rodriguez (Eds.), APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology, Vol. 1. Test theory and testing and assessment in industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 245–250). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14047-013

Fath

(2015). Quantifying economic and ecological sustainability. Ocean & Coastal Management, 108(2015), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.06.020

Flanagan

Levine

(2010). Civic engagement and transition to adulthood. Future of Children, 20(1), 159–179. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.0.0043

10.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcrar.2016.409.006

11.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

12.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology. The Broaden-and-built theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1O37//0OO3-O66X.56.3.218

13.

Galinha

I. C.

Pais-Ribeiro

(2005). Contribuição para o estudo da versão portuguesa da positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): II - Estudo psicométrico. Análise Psicológica, 23(2), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.14417/ap.84

14.

Gana

Broc

(2019). Structural equation modeling with Lavaan. John Wiley & Sons.

15.

Gaspar

Ribeiro

Leal

Matos

Ferreira

(2009). Adaptation and validation of Social Support Satisfaction Scale for children and adolescents. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 360–372. https://doi.org/10.1174/021347411797361284

16.

Clarke

Dougherty

(2015). Youth-led social change: Topics, engagement types, organizational types, strategies, and impacts. Futures, 67, 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2015.01.006

17.

Holden

R. R.

(2010). Face validity. Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0341

18.

Horn

J. L.

(1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrikaa, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447

19.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

20.

Jang

Reeve

Deci

E. L.

(2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019682

21.

Kasser

(2009). Psychological need satisfaction, personal well-being, and ecological sustainability. Ecopsychology, 1(4), 175–180. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2009.0025

22.

The KIDSCREEN Group Europe . (2006) . The KIDSCREEN questionnaires: Quality of life questionnaires for children and adolescents. Pabst Science Publishers.

23.

Mallinckrodt

Wang

C. D.

(2004). Quantitative methods for verifying semantic equivalence of translated research instruments: A Chinese version of the Experiences in Close Relationships Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(3), 368–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.51.3.368

24.

Marques

S. C.

Pais-Ribeiro

J. L.

Lopez

S. J.

(2007). Validation of a Portuguese version of the students’ life satisfaction scale. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 2(2), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-007-9031-5

25.

Moreira

P. A. S.

Cloninger

C. R.

Dinis

Sá

Oliveira

J. T.

Dias

Oliveira

(2015). Personality and well-being in adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1494. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01494

26.

Moreira

P. A. S.

Cunha

Inman

R. A.

(2020). An integration of multiple student engagement dimensions into a single measure and validity-based studies. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38(5), 564–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282919870973

27.

Moreira

P. A. S.

Ramalho

Inman

(2020). The Engagement/Disengagement in Sustainable Development Inventory (EDISDI): Psychometric properties and validity-based studies. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000619

28.

Prokesova

Vaculik

Kasparkova

Prochazka

(2019). An integrated model of work engagement: How the satisfaction of basic psychological needs explains the relationship between personality and work engagement. Psihologija, 52(3), 265–284. https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI181204004P

29.

Purvis

Mao

Robinson

(2019). Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Science, 14(3), 681–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5

30.

R Core Team . (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing.

31.

Raftery

A. E.

(1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–163. https://doi.org/10.2307/271063

32.

Rogers

D. S.

Duraiappah

A. K.

Antons

D. C.

Munoz

Bai

Gutscher

(2012). A vision for human well-being: Transition to social sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.01.013

33.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68

34.

Schermelleh-Engel

Moosbrugger

Müller

(2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research, 8(2), 28–74.

35.

Singh

Junnarkar

Kaur

(2016). Measures of positive psychology, development and validation. Springer.

36.

Tabachnick

Fidell

(2013). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson Education Inc.

37.

United Nations . (1997, April 08). Commission on sustainable development begins fifth session meeting as preparatory body for assembly’s review of agenda 21 [Press release]. https://www.un.org/press/en/1997/19970408.endev408.html

38.

Van Buuren

Groothuis-Oudshoorn

(2011). mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3), 1–63. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03

39.

Van der Hel

(2016). New science for global sustainability? The institutionalisation of knowledge co-production in Future Earth. Environmental Science and Policy, 61, 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.03.012

40.

Watts

R. J.

Flanagan

(2007). Pushing the envelope on youth civic engagement: A developmental and liberation psychology perspective. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(6), 779–792. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20178

41.

World Commission on Environment and Development . (1987) . Our common future. World commission on environment and development. Oxford University Press.