Gender gap in reading achievement: the mediating role of metacognitive strategies and reading-related attitudes

The purpose of this study is to explain the gender differences in reading achievement with the mediating role of metacognitive strategies and reading-related attitudes. Hypotheses were tested with 6890 students [3396 (49.3%) females, 3494 (50.7%) males] who participated in PISA 2018 in Turkey. The path analysis results indicated that gender had significant associations with metacognitive strategies and reading-related attitudes. One remarkable result is that gender affected metacognitive strategies about lower cognitive levels more than strategies about higher cognitive levels, and that the female advantage was reduced for upper metacognitive strategies. Additionally, reading-related attitudes, except for perception of reading competence, and metacognitive strategies were significantly associated with reading achievement. In addition, the results revealed that metacognitive strategies and reading-related attitudes, except for perception of reading competence, fully mediated gender and reading achievement. Overall, the results show that the gender difference in reading achievement is not only due to gender itself, but may also be due to differentiation of the metacognitive strategies and reading-related attitudes of girls and boys. As a result, the teaching of metacognitive strategies and development of reading-related attitudes to students are recommended, in order to reduce the gender gap in reading achievement. Limitations, practical implications, and recommendations for future research are discussed.

     

Is Racial Profiling a Legitimate Strategy in the Fight against Violent Crime?

Racial profiling has come under intense public scrutiny especially since the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement. This article discusses two questions: (1) whether racial profiling is sometimes rational, and (2) whether it can be morally permissible. It is argued that under certain circumstances the affirmative answer to both questions is justified.     

A Short Measure of the Revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory – RSQ17

The need for a research and practical tool, such as a short, reliable, and valid personality assessment test, suggests researchers to create shortened versions of original instruments. Reinforcement sensitivity questionnaire (RSQ) was created in line with some basic premises of revised Reinforcement sensitivity theory, which proposes three motivational and emotional systems: Behavioral inhibition system (BIS), responsible for scanning environment for potential threats, Behavioral activation system (BAS), responsible for aproaching behavior, and the Fight/Flight/Freeze system (FFFS), responsible for behavior in the present threat. RSQ comprises five scales: BIS, BAS, Fight, Flight, and Freeze. The aim of this study was to develop a short version of RSQ, which would be beneficial to both research and practical purposes. Item response theory analyses were used for item selection. The study comprised two samples of participants, whereby Sample 1 (N = 837, 34.6% male, aged 18 – 82, M = 31.63, SD = 13.54) served as the derivation sample, while Sample 2 (818 participants, 43.6% male, 18?75 years, M = 29.65, SD = 12.52) served as validation sample. Factorial validity of the short RSQ was examined on both Sample 1 and Sample 2. Convergent and divergent validity of the short RSQ was examined using RST-PQ, Jackson-5, BIS/BAS scales, and Big Five Inventory. The results point to satisfactory internal consistency, factorial validity, and construct validity of the short RSQ, suggesting that it is an adequate measure for research settings or other contexts which require the use of short personality questionnaires.     

How Accurate Are National Stereotypes? A Test of Different Methodological Approaches

We compared different methodological approaches in research on the accuracy of national stereotypes that use aggregated mean scores of real people's personality traits as criteria for stereotype accuracy. Our sample comprised 16,713 participants from the Central Europe and 1,090 participants from the Baltic Sea region. Participants rated national stereotypes of their own country using the National Character Survey (NCS) and their personality traits using either the Revised NEO Personality Inventory or the NCS. We examined the effects of different (i) methods for rating of real people (Revised NEO Personality Inventory vs. NCS) and national stereotypes (NCS); (ii) norms for converting raw scores into T‐scores (Russian vs. international norms); and (iii) correlation techniques (intraclass correlations vs. Pearson correlations vs. rank‐order correlations) on the resulting agreement between the ratings of national stereotypes and real people. We showed that the accuracy of national stereotypes depended on the employed methodology. The accuracy was the highest when ratings of real people and national stereotypes were made using the same method and when rank order correlations were used to estimate the agreement between national stereotypes and personality profiles of real people. We propose a new statistical procedure for determining national stereotype accuracy that overcomes limitations of past studies. We provide methodological recommendations applicable to a wider range of cross national stereotype accuracy studies. Copyright © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology