An evaluation of the measurement properties of the Mentor Self-Efficacy Scale among participants in Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada Community Mentoring Programs
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2013
An evaluation of the measurement properties of the Mentor Self-Efficacy Scale among participants in Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada Community Mentoring Programs
The measurement properties of a newly developed instrument, Mentor Self-Efficacy Scale, were examined among 249 Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) mentor, child, and parent triads. The unidimensional scale demonstrated acceptable reliability (α = 0.81) and convergent validity, with mentor self-efficacy (MSE) correlating with mentor reported global (r = 0.28, p<0.001) and engagement (r = 0.44, p<0.001) mentoring relationship quality (MRQ). The scale also yielded acceptable predictive validity, with MSE predicting mentor reported engagement MRQ (β = 0.28, p = 0.001). Results will contribute to future research using the scale to augment BBBS policies.
AneshenselC. (2002). Theory-based data analysis for the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
2.
AskewK. (2006). The influence of mentor training and support on academic mentor self-efficacy and relationship quality: From the perspectives of adult volunteer mentors and middle school youth Masters of Arts, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
3.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.
4.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
5.
BrownT. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
6.
DeWitD., LipmanE., BisanzJ., Da CostaJ., GrahamK., La RoseS., PeplerD., ShaverK., CoyleJ., DuBoisD., Manzano-MunguiaM. C. & FerroA. (2012). The longevity of community mentoring relationships as a predictor of youth internalizing and externalizing problems. Manuscript submitted for publication.
7.
DeWitD., LipmanE., BisanzJ., Da CostaJ., GrahamK., LaRoseS., PeplerD. & ShaverK. (2006). A longitudinal analysis of the effects of adult mentoring on children's health and well-being: An examination of the Big Brothers Big Sisters community match program: Canadian Institutes of Health Research Grant #81115. http://www.canmentor.ca/CAMH/default.asp?news.inc
8.
DeWitD., LipmanE., Manzano-MunguiaM., BisanzJ., GrahamK., OffordD., O'NeillE., PeplerD. & ShaverK. (2007). Feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial for evaluating the effectiveness of the Big Brothers Big Sisters community match program at the national level. Child and Youth Services Review, 29, 383–404.
9.
DuBoisD. L., PortilloN., RhodesJ. E., SilverthornN. & ValentineJ. C. (2011). How effective are mentoring programs for youth? A systematic assessment of the evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(2), 57–91.
10.
DuBoisD. & NevilleH. (1997). Youth mentoring: Investigation of relationship characteristics and perceived benefits. Journal of Community Psychology, 25, 227–234.
11.
FerroA., DeWitD., SpeechleyK., WellsS. & LipmanE.An evaluation of the measurement properties of the Global Mentoring Relationship Quality Scale and Instrumental Mentoring Relationship Quality Scale among mentors, children, and parents participating in Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada programs. Manuscript submitted for publication.
12.
GoodmanR. (2001). Psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Journal of the Americam Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337–1345.
13.
HatcherL. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using SAS for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Publishing.
14.
KarcherM., NakkulaM. & HarrisJ. (2005). Developmental mentoring match characteristics: Correspondence between mentors’ and mentees’ assessments of relationship quality. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 26(2), 93–110.
15.
KellerT. (2005). A systemic model of the youth mentoring intervention. Journal of Primary Prevention, 26(2), 169–188.
16.
KlineR. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
17.
LanghoutR. D., RhodesJ. E. & OsborneL. N. (2003). An exploratory study of youth mentoring in an urban context: Adolescents’ perceptions of relationship styles. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 33(4), 293–306.
18.
MartinS. M. & SifersS. K. (2012). An evaluation of factors leading to mentor satisfaction with the mentoring relationship. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 940–945.
19.
MuthenL. & MuthenB. (2010). M-plus statistical analysis with latent variables user's guide (6 ed.). Los Angeles, CA.
20.
ParraG., DuBoisD., NevilleH., Pugh-LillyA. & PovinelliN. (2002). Mentoring relationships for youth: Investigation of a process-oriented model. Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 367–388.
21.
RhodesJ., SpencerR., KellerT., LiangB. & NoamG. (2006). A model for the influence of mentoring relationships on youth development. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 691–707.
22.
RhodesJ. (2005). A model of youth mentoring. In DuboisD. & BaldwinJ. (Eds.), Handbook of youth mentoring (pp. 30–43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
23.
RhodesJ., ReddyR., RoffmanJ. & GrossmanJ. B. (2005). Promoting successful youth mentoring relationships: A preliminary screening questionnaire. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 26(2), 147–167.
24.
RiggsI. M. (2000). The impact of training and induction activities upon mentors as indicated through measurement of mentor self-efficacy. San Bernardino, CA.
25.
SaleE., BellamyN., SpringerF. & WangM. (2008). Quality of provider-participant relationships and enhancement of adolescent social skills. Journal of Primary Prevention, 29, 263–278.
26.
TierneyJ., GrossmanJ. & ReschN. (1995). Making a difference: An impact study of Big Brothers/Big Sisters. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.
27.
ZandD. H., ThomsonN., CervantesR., EspirituR., KlagholzD., LaBlancL. & TaylorA. (2009). The mentor-youth alliance: The role of mentoring rleationships in promoting youth competence. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 1–17.
