La estructura de la conducta prosocial. Su aproximación mediante el modelo bifactorial de la Teoría de la respuesta al Ítem Multidimensional
Palabras clave:
conducta prosocial, prosocialidad, teoría de la respuesta al ítem multidimensional, modelo bifactorial
Resumen
Problema y objetivos: Conocer si la estructura de la conducta prosocial medida por la Escala de Conducta Prosocial (ECP) puede ser representada por un factor general, la prosocialidad, combinado con los factores específicos, las subescalas de la ECP. Método: Se trató de una muestra por accesibilidad de 692 participantes (65% mujeres), residentes en Gran Buenos Aires e interior de la Argentina. Se comprobaron los supuestos de unidimensionalidad y dependencia local, posteriormente se comparó el ajuste relativo entre tres modelos de la Teoría de la Respuesta al Ítem: Modelo de Respuesta Graduada (MRG), Modelo de Respuesta Graduada Multidimensional (MRGM) y Modelo de Respuesta Graduada Bifactorial (MRGB). Resultados: El MRGB fue el modelo con mejor ajuste relativo, se implementó dicho modelo calculándose los parámetros condicionales y marginales. Asimismo, se calculó el índice ECV. Conclusiones: Los ítems de la ECP fueron influenciados primariamente por la prosocialidad. La subescala Ayuda explicó una proporción importante de la varianza común. En cambio, la subescala Confortar, considerada como factor específico, explicó una parte pequeña de dicha varianza.
Descargas
La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.
Citas
Abal, F. J. P., Auné, S. E., & Attorresi, H. F. (2018). Variación de la escala Likert en el test de Utilidad de la Matemática. Interacciones, 4(3), 177-189. doi: 10.24016/2018.v4n3.134
American Psychological Association (2010). Ethical Principles for Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Washington, D.C.: APA.
Auné, S. E., Abal, F. J. P., & Attorresi, H. F. (2016). Antagonismos entre concepciones de empatía y su relación con la conducta prosocial. Revista de Psicología, 17(2), 137-149. doi: 10.18050/revpsi.v17n2a7.2015
Auné, S. E., & Attorresi, H. F. (2017). Dimensionalidad de un Test de Conducta Prosocial. Revista Evaluar, 17(1), 29-37.
Auné, S. E., Blum, G. D., Abal, F. J. P., Lozzia, G. S., & Attorresi, H. F. (2014). La conducta prosocial: Estado actual de la investigación. Perspectivas en Psicología, 11(2), 21-33.
Ayala, R. J. de (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 57(1), 289-300.
Berge, J. M. ten, & Soèan G. (2004). The greatest lower bound to the reliability of a test and the hypothesis of unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 69(4), 613- 625.
Bjorner, J. B., Smith, K. J., Edelen, M. O., Stone, C., Thissen, D., & Sun, X. (2007). IRTFIT: A macro for item fit and local dependence tests under IRT models. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated.
Bock, R. D., & Gibbons, R. (2010). Factor analysis of categorical item responses. In M. L. Nering & R. Ostini (Eds.), Handbook of polytomous item response theory models (pp. 155-184). New York, NY: Routledge.
Cai, L. (2012). flexMIRT: Flexible multilevel item factor analysis and test scoring [Computer software]. Seattle, WA: Vector Psychometric Group, LLC.
Cai, L., Thissen, D., & Toit, S. du (2011). IRTPRO user’s guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientiûc Software International.
Cai, Y. (2015). The value of using test response data for content validity: An application of the bifactor-MIRT to a nursing knowledge test. Nurse Education Today, 35(12), 1181-1185. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.05.014
Caprara, G. V., Alessandri, G., & Eisenerg, N. (2012). Prosociality: the contribution of traits, values, and self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1289-1303. doi: 10.1037/a0025626
Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1993). Early emotional instability, prosocial behavior, and aggression: some methodological aspects. European Journal of Personality, 7(1), 19-36. doi: 10.1002/per.2410070103
Caprara, G. V., Steca, P., Zelli, A., & Capanna, C. (2005). A new scale for measuring adults’ prosocialness. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21(2), 77-89. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.21.2.77
Carlo, G., & Randall, B. A. (2002). The Development of a Measure of Prosocial Behaviors for Late Adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(1), 31-44. doi: 10.1023/A:1014033032440
Carrasco, C., & Trianes, M. V. (2010). Clima social, prosocialidad y violencia como predictores de inadaptación escolar en primaria. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 3(2), 229-242. https:/ /doi.org/10.30552/ejep.v3i2.54
Chen, W., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indixes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 265-289. doi: 10.3102/10769986022003265
Cuadrado, E., Tabernero, C., García, R., Luque, B., & Seibert, J. (2017). The Role of Prosocialness and Trust in the Consumption of Water as a Limited Resource. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 694. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00694
Dunfield, K. A. (2014). A construct divided: prosocial behavior as helping, sharing, and comforting subtypes. Front. Psychol, 5, 958. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00958
Eisenberg, N., Eggum, N. D., & Giunta, L. di (2010). Empathy-Related Responding: Associations with Prosocial Behavior, Aggression, and Intergroup Relations. Social Issues and Policy Review, 4(1), 143-180. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x
Eisenberg, N., & Spinrad, T. L. (2014). Multidimensionality of prosocial behavior. Rethinking the conceptualization and development of prosocial behavior. In L. M. Padilla-Walker & G. Carlo (Eds.), Prosocial development: A multidimensional approach (pp. 17-39). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199964772.003.0002
Ferguson, E., Zhao, K., O’Carroll, R. E., & Smillie, L. D. (2018). Costless and Costly Prosociality: Correspondence Among Personality Traits, Economic Preferences, and Real-World Prosociality. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(4), 461-471. doi: 10.1177/1948550618765071
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2017). Program FACTOR at 10: Origins, development and future directions. Psicothema, 29(2), 236-240. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2016.304
Gatner, D. T., Douglas, K. S., & Hart, S. D. (2016). Examining the incremental and interactive effects of boldness with meanness and disinhibition within the triarchic model of psychopathy. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 7(3), 259-268. doi: 10.1037/per0000182
Gibbons, R. D., Bock, R. D., Hedeker, D., Weiss, D. J., Segawa, E., Bhaumik, D. K., ... Stover, A. (2007). Full-Information Item Bifactor Analysis of Graded Response Data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31(1), 4-19. doi: 10.1177/0146621606289485
Gibbons, R. D., & Hedeker, D. R. (1992). Full- information bi-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 57(3), 423-436.
González, M. D. (2000). Conducta prosocial: Evaluación e Intervención. Madrid, España: Morata.
Hay, D. F., & Cook, K. V. (2007). The transformation of prosocial behavior from infancy to childhood. In C. A. Brownell & C. B. Kopp (Eds.), Socioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations (pp. 100-131). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
Inderbitzen, H. M., & Foster, S. L. (1992). The Teenage Inventory of Social Skills: Development, reliability, and validity. Psychological Assessment, 4(4), 451- 459. doi: 0.1037/1040-3590.4.4.451
Kelley, K., & Lai, K. (2017). The MBESS R Package version 4.2.0. Recuperado de https://cran.r- project.org/web/packages/MBESS/MBESS.pdf
Knafo-Noam, A., Uzefovsky, F., Israel, S., Davidov, M., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2015). The prosocial personality and its facets: genetic and environmental architecture of mother-reported behavior of 7-year-old twins. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 112. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00112
Ladd, G. W., & Profilet, S. M. (1996). The Child Behavior Scale: A teacher-report measure of young children’s aggressive, withdrawn, and prosocial behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 32(6), 1008-1024. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.32.6.1008
Langer, M. (2008). A reexamination of Lord’s Wald test for differential item functioning using item response theory and modern error estimation (Tesis doctoral, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill). Recuperada de https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/204e/ a4e24df2284f4c6833b73ec18a01964fe2ca.pdf
Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the Number of Response Categories on the Reliability and Validity of Rating Scales. Methodology, 4(2), 73-79. doi: 10.1027/1614- 2241.4.2.73
Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2005). Limited and full information estimation and testing in 2n Contingency Tables: A Unified Framework. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 1009-1020. doi: 10.1198/016214504000002069
Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2006). Limited Information Goodness-of-fit Testing in Multidimensional Contingency Tables. Psychometrika, 71, 713-732. doi: 10.1007/s11336- 005-1295-9
Mestre, M. V., Samper, P., & Frías, M. D. (2002). Procesos cognitivos y emocionales predictores de la conducta prosocial y agresiva: La empatía como factor modulador. Psicothema, 14(2), 227-232.
Muraki, E., & Carlson, J. E. (1995). Full-Information Factor Analysis for Polytomous Item Responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19(1), 73-90. doi: 10.1177/014662169501900109
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2000). Likelihood-Based Item Fit Indices for Dichotomous Item Response Theory Models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(1), 50-64. doi: 10.1177/ 01466216000241003
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further Investigation of the Performance of S-÷2: An Item Fit Index for Use With Dichotomous Item Response Theory Models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27(4), 289- 298. doi: 10.1177/0146621603027004004
Ouyang, X., Xin, T., & Chen, F. (2016). Construct Validity of the Children’s Coping Strategies Scale (CCSS) A Bifactor Model Approach. Psychological Reports, 118(1), 199-218. doi: 10.1177/0033294116628362
Penner, L., Fritzsche, B., Craiger, J., & Freifeld, T. (1995). Measuring the prosocial personality. In J. Butcher, & C. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in Personality Assessment (Vol. 10). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., & Haviland, M. G. (2010). Bifactor Models and Rotations: Exploring the Extent to Which Multidimensional Data Yield Univocal Scale Scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(6), 544-559. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2010.496477
Roche, R. (1998). El uso educativo de la televisión como optimizadora de la prosocialidad. Psychosocial Intervention, 7(3), 363-377.
Samejima, F. (1968). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika monograph supplement, 17(4), 2. doi: 10.1002/j.2333-8504.1968.tb00153.x
Strakatý, S. (2016). Relationship between Traumatic Experience and Prosocial Behavior (Tesis de bachillerato). State University of New York, Empire State College.
Stucky, B. D., & Edelen, M. O. (2015). Using hierarchical IRT models to create unidimensional measures from multidimensional data. In S. P. Reise & D. A. Revicki (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory modeling: Applications to typical performance assessment (pp. 183-206). New York, NY: Routledge.
Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., & Edelen, M. O. (2013). Using Logistic Approximations of Marginal Trace Lines to Develop Short Assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(1), 41-57. doi: 10.1177/ 0146621612462759
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights, MA: Ally and Bacon.
Toland, M. D., Sulis, I., Giambona, F., Porcu, M., & Campbell, J. M. (2017). Introduction to bifactor polytomous item response theory analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 60, 41-63. doi: 10.1016/ j.jsp.2016.11.001
Warneken, F., & Tomasello, M. (2009). The roots of human altruism. British Journal of Psychology, 100(3), 455-471. doi: 10.1348/000712608X379061
American Psychological Association (2010). Ethical Principles for Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Washington, D.C.: APA.
Auné, S. E., Abal, F. J. P., & Attorresi, H. F. (2016). Antagonismos entre concepciones de empatía y su relación con la conducta prosocial. Revista de Psicología, 17(2), 137-149. doi: 10.18050/revpsi.v17n2a7.2015
Auné, S. E., & Attorresi, H. F. (2017). Dimensionalidad de un Test de Conducta Prosocial. Revista Evaluar, 17(1), 29-37.
Auné, S. E., Blum, G. D., Abal, F. J. P., Lozzia, G. S., & Attorresi, H. F. (2014). La conducta prosocial: Estado actual de la investigación. Perspectivas en Psicología, 11(2), 21-33.
Ayala, R. J. de (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 57(1), 289-300.
Berge, J. M. ten, & Soèan G. (2004). The greatest lower bound to the reliability of a test and the hypothesis of unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 69(4), 613- 625.
Bjorner, J. B., Smith, K. J., Edelen, M. O., Stone, C., Thissen, D., & Sun, X. (2007). IRTFIT: A macro for item fit and local dependence tests under IRT models. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated.
Bock, R. D., & Gibbons, R. (2010). Factor analysis of categorical item responses. In M. L. Nering & R. Ostini (Eds.), Handbook of polytomous item response theory models (pp. 155-184). New York, NY: Routledge.
Cai, L. (2012). flexMIRT: Flexible multilevel item factor analysis and test scoring [Computer software]. Seattle, WA: Vector Psychometric Group, LLC.
Cai, L., Thissen, D., & Toit, S. du (2011). IRTPRO user’s guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientiûc Software International.
Cai, Y. (2015). The value of using test response data for content validity: An application of the bifactor-MIRT to a nursing knowledge test. Nurse Education Today, 35(12), 1181-1185. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.05.014
Caprara, G. V., Alessandri, G., & Eisenerg, N. (2012). Prosociality: the contribution of traits, values, and self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1289-1303. doi: 10.1037/a0025626
Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1993). Early emotional instability, prosocial behavior, and aggression: some methodological aspects. European Journal of Personality, 7(1), 19-36. doi: 10.1002/per.2410070103
Caprara, G. V., Steca, P., Zelli, A., & Capanna, C. (2005). A new scale for measuring adults’ prosocialness. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21(2), 77-89. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.21.2.77
Carlo, G., & Randall, B. A. (2002). The Development of a Measure of Prosocial Behaviors for Late Adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(1), 31-44. doi: 10.1023/A:1014033032440
Carrasco, C., & Trianes, M. V. (2010). Clima social, prosocialidad y violencia como predictores de inadaptación escolar en primaria. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 3(2), 229-242. https:/ /doi.org/10.30552/ejep.v3i2.54
Chen, W., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indixes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 265-289. doi: 10.3102/10769986022003265
Cuadrado, E., Tabernero, C., García, R., Luque, B., & Seibert, J. (2017). The Role of Prosocialness and Trust in the Consumption of Water as a Limited Resource. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 694. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00694
Dunfield, K. A. (2014). A construct divided: prosocial behavior as helping, sharing, and comforting subtypes. Front. Psychol, 5, 958. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00958
Eisenberg, N., Eggum, N. D., & Giunta, L. di (2010). Empathy-Related Responding: Associations with Prosocial Behavior, Aggression, and Intergroup Relations. Social Issues and Policy Review, 4(1), 143-180. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x
Eisenberg, N., & Spinrad, T. L. (2014). Multidimensionality of prosocial behavior. Rethinking the conceptualization and development of prosocial behavior. In L. M. Padilla-Walker & G. Carlo (Eds.), Prosocial development: A multidimensional approach (pp. 17-39). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199964772.003.0002
Ferguson, E., Zhao, K., O’Carroll, R. E., & Smillie, L. D. (2018). Costless and Costly Prosociality: Correspondence Among Personality Traits, Economic Preferences, and Real-World Prosociality. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(4), 461-471. doi: 10.1177/1948550618765071
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2017). Program FACTOR at 10: Origins, development and future directions. Psicothema, 29(2), 236-240. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2016.304
Gatner, D. T., Douglas, K. S., & Hart, S. D. (2016). Examining the incremental and interactive effects of boldness with meanness and disinhibition within the triarchic model of psychopathy. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 7(3), 259-268. doi: 10.1037/per0000182
Gibbons, R. D., Bock, R. D., Hedeker, D., Weiss, D. J., Segawa, E., Bhaumik, D. K., ... Stover, A. (2007). Full-Information Item Bifactor Analysis of Graded Response Data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31(1), 4-19. doi: 10.1177/0146621606289485
Gibbons, R. D., & Hedeker, D. R. (1992). Full- information bi-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 57(3), 423-436.
González, M. D. (2000). Conducta prosocial: Evaluación e Intervención. Madrid, España: Morata.
Hay, D. F., & Cook, K. V. (2007). The transformation of prosocial behavior from infancy to childhood. In C. A. Brownell & C. B. Kopp (Eds.), Socioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations (pp. 100-131). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
Inderbitzen, H. M., & Foster, S. L. (1992). The Teenage Inventory of Social Skills: Development, reliability, and validity. Psychological Assessment, 4(4), 451- 459. doi: 0.1037/1040-3590.4.4.451
Kelley, K., & Lai, K. (2017). The MBESS R Package version 4.2.0. Recuperado de https://cran.r- project.org/web/packages/MBESS/MBESS.pdf
Knafo-Noam, A., Uzefovsky, F., Israel, S., Davidov, M., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2015). The prosocial personality and its facets: genetic and environmental architecture of mother-reported behavior of 7-year-old twins. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 112. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00112
Ladd, G. W., & Profilet, S. M. (1996). The Child Behavior Scale: A teacher-report measure of young children’s aggressive, withdrawn, and prosocial behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 32(6), 1008-1024. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.32.6.1008
Langer, M. (2008). A reexamination of Lord’s Wald test for differential item functioning using item response theory and modern error estimation (Tesis doctoral, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill). Recuperada de https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/204e/ a4e24df2284f4c6833b73ec18a01964fe2ca.pdf
Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the Number of Response Categories on the Reliability and Validity of Rating Scales. Methodology, 4(2), 73-79. doi: 10.1027/1614- 2241.4.2.73
Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2005). Limited and full information estimation and testing in 2n Contingency Tables: A Unified Framework. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 1009-1020. doi: 10.1198/016214504000002069
Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2006). Limited Information Goodness-of-fit Testing in Multidimensional Contingency Tables. Psychometrika, 71, 713-732. doi: 10.1007/s11336- 005-1295-9
Mestre, M. V., Samper, P., & Frías, M. D. (2002). Procesos cognitivos y emocionales predictores de la conducta prosocial y agresiva: La empatía como factor modulador. Psicothema, 14(2), 227-232.
Muraki, E., & Carlson, J. E. (1995). Full-Information Factor Analysis for Polytomous Item Responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19(1), 73-90. doi: 10.1177/014662169501900109
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2000). Likelihood-Based Item Fit Indices for Dichotomous Item Response Theory Models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(1), 50-64. doi: 10.1177/ 01466216000241003
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further Investigation of the Performance of S-÷2: An Item Fit Index for Use With Dichotomous Item Response Theory Models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27(4), 289- 298. doi: 10.1177/0146621603027004004
Ouyang, X., Xin, T., & Chen, F. (2016). Construct Validity of the Children’s Coping Strategies Scale (CCSS) A Bifactor Model Approach. Psychological Reports, 118(1), 199-218. doi: 10.1177/0033294116628362
Penner, L., Fritzsche, B., Craiger, J., & Freifeld, T. (1995). Measuring the prosocial personality. In J. Butcher, & C. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in Personality Assessment (Vol. 10). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., & Haviland, M. G. (2010). Bifactor Models and Rotations: Exploring the Extent to Which Multidimensional Data Yield Univocal Scale Scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(6), 544-559. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2010.496477
Roche, R. (1998). El uso educativo de la televisión como optimizadora de la prosocialidad. Psychosocial Intervention, 7(3), 363-377.
Samejima, F. (1968). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika monograph supplement, 17(4), 2. doi: 10.1002/j.2333-8504.1968.tb00153.x
Strakatý, S. (2016). Relationship between Traumatic Experience and Prosocial Behavior (Tesis de bachillerato). State University of New York, Empire State College.
Stucky, B. D., & Edelen, M. O. (2015). Using hierarchical IRT models to create unidimensional measures from multidimensional data. In S. P. Reise & D. A. Revicki (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory modeling: Applications to typical performance assessment (pp. 183-206). New York, NY: Routledge.
Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., & Edelen, M. O. (2013). Using Logistic Approximations of Marginal Trace Lines to Develop Short Assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(1), 41-57. doi: 10.1177/ 0146621612462759
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights, MA: Ally and Bacon.
Toland, M. D., Sulis, I., Giambona, F., Porcu, M., & Campbell, J. M. (2017). Introduction to bifactor polytomous item response theory analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 60, 41-63. doi: 10.1016/ j.jsp.2016.11.001
Warneken, F., & Tomasello, M. (2009). The roots of human altruism. British Journal of Psychology, 100(3), 455-471. doi: 10.1348/000712608X379061
Publicado
2019-06-18
Cómo citar
Auné, S., Abal, F., & Attorresi, H. (2019, junio 18). La estructura de la conducta prosocial. Su aproximación mediante el modelo bifactorial de la Teoría de la respuesta al Ítem Multidimensional. LIBERABIT. Revista Peruana De Psicología, 25(1), 41 - 56. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2019.v25n1.04
Sección
Artículos Originales
Esta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Derechos de autor: En caso de que el manuscrito sea aprobado para su publicación, los autores conservarán los derechos de autoría y cederán a la revista los derechos de publicación, edición, reproducción, distribución, exhibición y comunicación a nivel nacional e internacional en las diferentes bases de datos, repositorios y portales.
Política de autoarchivo: El autor puede compartir, difundir y divulgar sus investigaciones publicadas por los medios de comunicación (e.g., redes sociales académicas, repositorios y portales) disponibles en la web. Durante el proceso de revisión editorial, la revista entregará al autor las versiones previas (post-print), las cuales NO deben ser divulgadas por ningún medio de difusión y son solo de uso personal con fines de aprobación final. Liberabit enviará al autor la versión final del artículo (published version) en formato PDF y HTML para ser compartida, difundida y divulgada por los medios de comunicación disponibles en la web. Después de la publicación de los artículos, los autores pueden realizar acuerdos independientes o adicionales para la difusión no exclusiva de la versión del artículo publicado en la revista (por ejemplo, publicación en libros o repositorios institucionales), siempre que se indique con la referencia respectiva que el trabajo ha sido publicado por primera vez en esta revista.
