The Community Service Self-Efficacy
Construct in Engaged Scholarship
and Service-Learning Research
Roger N. Reeb
Susan F. Folger
Stacey Langsner
Brigitte Beale
University of Dayton
Presented at the Tenth Annual International Research
Conference on Service Learning and Community Engagement
1
Purpose of Presentation
To briefly review research and theory on the selfefficacy construct
To explain the role of self-efficacy in servicelearning and engaged scholarship.
To review over 10 years of research on the
Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale (CSSES).
To provide recommendations for future research.
2
Definition of Self-Efficacy
“…an expectation of personal mastery…”
Source: Bandura (1977, p. 191)
“…self-appraisal of operative capability…”
Source: Bandura (1982, p. 123)
“…a conviction that one can execute the
behavior required to produce the [desired] outcomes…”
Source: Bandura (1977, p. 193)
“…a belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute
the courses of action required to manage prospective
situations…”
Source: Bandura (1995, p. 2)
3
Sources of Efficacy Information
Enactive Mastery Experiences
– Past success and failure in the situation
Vicarious Experiences
– Observations of how others cope in the situation
Verbal Persuasion
– Encouragement and discouragement from others
Anticipatory Arousal
– Emotional and physiological reactivity
4
Self-Efficacy vs. Outcome Expectations
Bandura’s Distinction:
“…self-efficacy is a judgment of one’s ability to organize and
execute given types of performances, whereas an outcome
expectation is a judgment of the likely consequences such
actions would produce…”
– Source: Bandura (1997, p. 21)
Relevance of Distinction for Service-Learning:
“…In the area of service-learning,…a student may believe that a
particular set of actions (e.g., performing as a literacy tutor)
would make a positive difference in the community, but if the
student has serious doubts as to whether he or she has the
capacity to perform the set of actions, such information would
not influence the student’s behavior…”
– Source: Reeb et al. (1998, p. 48)
5
Self-Efficacy: Overview of Research
Three decades of research supports Bandura’s
(1977) original hypothesis:
– “…expectations of personal efficacy determine whether
coping behavior is initiated, how much effort will be
expended, and how long it will be sustained in the face of
obstacles and aversive experiences…”
Across situations, circumstances, and
populations, research indicates that:
– Self-efficacy improves in individuals over the course of
interventions, treatments, or training experiences.
– Self-efficacy is positively correlated with future
performance attainments and inversely correlated with
anxiety during performance.
6
Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale
(CSSES) - See Appendix A
Purpose:
“The CSSES was constructed to assess the
individual’s confidence in his or her own ability to
make clinically significant contributions to the
community through service.”
Source: Reeb et al. (1998, p. 48)
Intended Uses:
The CSSES was intended for use as an outcome
variable, mediating variable, or moderator variable
in service-learning, engaged scholarship, and
other community action research.
7
Rationale for the CSSES
The construct of self-efficacy is inherently pertinent to
the goals of service-learning.
CSSES fills a void, since most measures used in
service-learning research focused on…
Motives (e.g., reasons to engage in service)
Values (e.g., social responsibility)
Beliefs and Attitudes (e.g., obligation to serve)
Perceived community needs
Self-Efficacy is considered a core element of the
civic-minded graduate (Bringle & Steinberg, in press).
8
The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale
1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10
Quite
Uncertain
Certain
____ 1. If I choose to participate in community service in the future, I will be able to make a meaningful
contribution.
____ 2. In the future, I will be able to find community service opportunities which are relevant to my
interests and abilities.
____ 3. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting social justice.
____ 4. I am confident that, through community service, I can make a difference in my community.
____ 5. I am confident that I can help individuals in need by participating in community service activities.
____ 6. I am confident that, in future community service activities, I will be able to interact with relevant
professionals in ways that are meaningful and effective.
____ 7. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting equal opportunity for
citizens.
____ 8. Through community service, I can apply knowledge in ways that solve “real-life” problems.
____ 9. By participating in community service, I can help people to help themselves.
____10. I am confident that I will participate in community service activities in the future.
9
Psychometric Properties of
the CSSES
10
Reliability of CSSES
Internal Consistency
– Coefficient alpha consistently above .90
Test-Retest Reliability (Temporal Consistency)
– The pre- to post-semester reliability coefficient was
high in magnitude (r = .68) and statistically significant
in studies of college students.
– Over a six-month period, the coefficient was high in
magnitude (r = .93) and statistically significant in a
study of adolescents on probation.
11
Reliability of CSSES (continued)
Alternate-Forms Reliability
– Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale – Sensitive to
Change (CSSES-SC) (see Appendix B)
An alternate form that prevents ceiling effects by asking
participants to compare themselves to “an individual with 10
years of community service experience” as they rate items
Reliability Coefficient:
N = 272, pr = .57, p < .001
12
Reliability of CSSES (continued)
Alternate-Forms Reliability
– Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale Retrospective Version (CSSES-RV) (Appendix C)
An alternate form designed to assess students’
retrospective perceptions of a course’s contribution to their
self-efficacy for service.
Reliability Coefficient:
N = 272, pr = .52, p < .001
13
Factor Structure of CSSES
A factor analysis was conducted with a large
sample of college students (N = 676).
CSSES items and items reflecting related
constructs were factor analyzed.
CSSES items loaded heavily on a separate
unique factor, suggesting that the CSSES is
unidimensional.
14
Defining the Nomological Network
of the CSSES
As first explained by Cronbach and Meehl
(1955), defining the nomological network for a
measure involves examining…
– Discriminant Validity
– Convergent Validity
15
Discriminant Validity of CSSES
Social Desirability
– Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960)
N = 394, r = .09, p > .05
– Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (Paulhus, 1988)
Total: N = 272, r = .16, p < .007
Self-Deception: N = 272, r = .07, p > .05
Impression Management: N = 272, r = .19, p < .002
16
Discriminant Validity of CSSES
(continued)
Social Alienation
– Powerlessness Scale (Neal & Groat, 1974)
N = 121, pr = -.37, p < .001
– Dean Alienation Scale (Dean, 1961)
N = 608, pr = -.14, p < .01
– Anomia Scale (Srole, 1956)
N = 121, pr = -.29, p < .01
– Alienation Scale (Maddi et al., 1979)
N = 121, pr = -.23, p < .05
17
Convergent Validity of CSSES
Generalized Self-Efficacy
– New General Self-Efficacy Scale (Chen et al., 2001)
–N = 608, r = .29, p < .001
– General Self-Efficacy Scale (Sherer et al., 1982)
–N = 608, r = .24, p < .001
18
Convergent Validity of CSSES
(continued)
Behavioral Intentions for Civic Action
– Civic Action Scale (Moely et al., 2002)
N = 608, pr = .65, p < .001
19
Convergent Validity of CSSES
(continued)
Hope
– The Hope Scale (Snyder et al., 1991)
N = 608, pr = .27, p < .001
20
Convergent Validity of CSSES
(continued)
Self-Esteem
– CSSES and Rosenberg (1965) Self-Esteem Scale
N = 608, pr = .17, p < .001
21
Convergent Validity of CSSES
(continued)
Generativity
– Loyola Generativity Scale (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992)
N = 272, pr = .42, p < .001
22
Convergent Validity of CSSES
(continued)
Growth Motivation
– Growth Motivation Index (Park et al., 2009)
N = 272, pr = .36, p < .001
23
Convergent Validity of CSSES
(continued)
Empathy
– Multidimensional Emotional Empathy Scale (Caruso & Mayer, 1998)
N = 272, pr = .47, p < .001
– Interpersonal Reactivity Scale (Davis, 1983)
N = 272, pr = .32, p < .001
24
Criterion-Related (Concurrent)
Validity of CSSES
Across studies, the method of contrasting groups
indicates that students who pursue servicelearning have higher CSSES scores than those
who do not.
For example, one study reported by Reeb et al.
(1998) demonstrated a direct linear pattern: the
more types of service that students participated
in, the higher were their CSSES scores.
In that study, multiple regression analyses
indicated: Among several measures of servicerelated beliefs or values, the CSSES was the best
predictor of service involvement and satisfaction.
25
Sensitivity in Detecting Changes
In quasi-experimental research (i.e., service-learning
students vs. non-participants), the CSSES has
detected changes in self-efficacy during service.
However, when students have strong service
backgrounds at pre-test, a CSSES ceiling effect may
preclude detection of self-efficacy improvements.
An alternate form (Appendix B) is more sensitive in
detecting changes in this situation.
When pre-test assessment is not possible, an
alternate retrospective form is useful (Appendix C).
26
Sensitivity in Detecting Changes
(Continued)
Adolescents with felony offenses (N = 40) were matched
for age and randomly assigned to conditions (Reeb, 2006):
– Community Service Diversion Program (n = 20)
– Routine Probation (n = 20)
Results:
– Adolescents in the Community-Based Diversion Program had
increases in CSSES scores over a six-month period.
– Adolescents in Routine Probation did not show changes in CSSES
scores.
– Recidivism was more likely for adolescents in Routine Probation
(13 out of 20 cases) than for adolescents in the Community Service
Diversion Program (5 out of 20 cases).
27
CSSES: Gender Differences
Across studies, females score higher on the CSSES.
The gender difference is small-to-moderate,
statistically significant, and consistently observed.
While males score higher on measures of general
self-efficacy, the current finding is consistent with the
finding that females score higher on measures of…
– intentions for community service
– obligation for community service
– positive attitudes toward community service
28
Recommendations for Future
Two General Sets of Research Recommendations:
– Further validation research on psychometric
properties of CSSES
– Research capturing the complexities of the selfefficacy construct in service-learning and engaged
scholarship
In general, prospective longitudinal research would be
ideal. It would allow consideraton of Bandura’s (1978)
principle of reciprocal determinism in examining changes
in self-efficacy that emerge over time in individuals
involved in community service.
29
CSSES: Future Validation Research
Fully define the nomological network of the CSESS by
continuing to examine convergent and discriminant validity
Further validation of alternate CSSES versions to assure
that they address assessment problems as intended.
Translate CSSES into different languages.
Cross validation research with diverse populations and
individuals in different cultures.
Determine utility of CSSES for assessing changes in
community members within the context of service-learning
and engaged scholarship.
30
.
Research Capturing Complexities of
the Self-Efficacy Construct
How does community service self-efficacy change in students
as they encounter success and failure experiences during
service provision?
Does community service self-efficacy moderate or mediate
other student outcomes (or community outcomes) during
service-learning?
How do different reflection methods influence the community
service self-efficacy of students in service-learning?
Does self-efficacy predict future community service?
Does self-efficacy predict community service effectiveness?
31
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33, 344-358.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Bringle, R. G., & Steinberg, K. (in press). Educating for informed community involvement. American Journal of
Community Psychology.
Caruso, D. R., & Mayer, J. D. (1998). A Measure of Emotional Empathy for Adolescents and Adults.
Unpublished Manuscript.
Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organizational Research
Methods, 4, 62-83.
Crohnbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1964). The approval motive: Studies in evaluation dependence. New York: Wiley.
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113-126.
Dean, D. (1961). Alienation: Its meaning and measurement. American Sociological Review, 26, 753-758.
Maddi, S. R., Kobasa, S. C., & Hoover, M. (1979). An alienation test. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 19, 73-76.
McAdams, D. P., de St. Aubin, E. (1992). A theory of generativity and its assessment through self-report, behavioral acts,
and narrative themes in autobiography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 1003-1015.
32
References (continued)
Moely, B. E., Mercer, S. H., Ilustre, V., Miron, D., & McFarland, M. (2002). Psychometric properties and correlates of the
Civic Attitudes and Skills Questionnaire (CASQ): A measure of students’ attitudes related to service-learning.
Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 8, 15-26.
Neal, A. G., & Groat, H. T. (1974). Social class correlates of stability and change in levels of alienation. Sociological
Quarterly, 15, 548-558.
Park, S. W., Bauer, J. J., & Arbuckle, N. B. (2009). Growth motivation attenuates the self- serving attribution. Journal of
Research in Personality, 43, 914-917.
Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of social desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 46, 598-609.
Reeb, R. N. (2006a). The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale: Further evidence of reliability and validity. In R.N. Reeb
(Ed.), Community action research: Benefits to community members and service providers (pp. 97-113). New
York: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Reeb, R. N. (2006b). Community service self-efficacy: Research review. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10, 242-248.
Reeb, R. N., Folger, S. F., Langsner, S., Ryan, C., & Crouse, J. (in press). Self-efficacy in service-learning community
action research: Theory, research, and practice. American Journal of Community Psychology.
Reeb, R. N., Katsuyama, R. M., Sammon, J. A., & Yoder, D. S. (1998). The Community Self-Efficacy Scale: Evidence of
reliability, construct validity, and pragmatic utility. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 5, 48-57.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sherer, M., Maddus, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The Self-Efficacy
Scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51, 671.
Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M., Sigmon, S. T., et al. (1991). The will and the ways:
Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 60, 570-585.
Srole, L. (1956). Social integration and certain corollaries. American Sociological Review, 21, 709-716.
33
Appendix A: The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale
1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10
Quite
Uncertain
Certain
____ 1. If I choose to participate in community service in the future, I will be able to make a meaningful
contribution.
____ 2. In the future, I will be able to find community service opportunities which are relevant to my
interests and abilities.
____ 3. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting social justice.
____ 4. I am confident that, through community service, I can make a difference in my community.
____ 5. I am confident that I can help individuals in need by participating in community service activities.
____ 6. I am confident that, in future community service activities, I will be able to interact with relevant
professionals in ways that are meaningful and effective.
____ 7. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting equal opportunity for
citizens.
____ 8. Through community service, I can apply knowledge in ways that solve “real-life” problems.
____ 9. By participating in community service, I can help people to help themselves.
____10. I am confident that I will participate in community service activities in the future.
34
Appendix B: The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale –
Sensitive to Change Version (CSSES-SC)
1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10
Less than the
Greater than the
experienced participant
experienced participant
Compared to an individual with 10 years of community service experience, how confident are
you about…
____ 1.
…making a meaningful contributions to the community through service?
____ 2.
…finding community service opportunities that are relevant to your interests and abilities?
____ 3.
…helping to promote social justice through community service?
____ 4.
…making a difference in your community through service?
____ 5.
…helping individuals in need by participating in community service activities?
____ 6.
…interacting with professionals in meaningful and effective ways in future community service?
____ 7.
...helping to promote equal opportunity for citizens?
____ 8.
…applying knowledge in ways that solve “real-life” problems?
____ 9.
…helping people to help themselves?
____ 10. …being willing to participate in community service in the future?
35
Appendix C: The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale Retrospective Version (CSSES-RV)
1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10
Quite
Uncertain
Certain
This course increased or strengthened my confidence that, in the future, I will be able to…
____
1. …make meaningful contributions to the community through service.
____
2.
…find community service opportunities which are relevant to my interests and abilities.
____
3.
…help in promoting social justice through community.
____
4.
…service.make a difference in the community through community service.
____
5. …help individuals in need by participating in community service activities.
____
6. …interact with relevant community professionals in ways that are meaningful and effective.
____
7.
…help in promoting equal opportunity for citizens through my community service activities.
____
8.
…apply my knowledge to community service in ways that help to solve “real-life” problems.
____
9.
…help people to help themselves as I engage in community.
____ 10. …commit myself to community service.
36