(r5/C0.46) ( Cheng & Furnham, 2002 ), and with feelings of shame ( r5/C0.38), and procrastination ( r5/C0.43)
(Canter, 2008 ). PEI scores did not share significant relationships with socioeconomic status, degree of religious
affiliation and involvement, whether people had lived with their parents at the age of 15, family size, birth order,
or measures of social desirability ( Shrauger & Schohn, 1995 ). Furthermore, no significant correlations were evi-
dent with Agreeableness ( r5.05).
Construct/Factor Analytic
Shauger and Schohn (1995) reported the results of a principal components analysis with varimax rotation
(N5211 undergraduates). They found that the content specific items were loaded appropriately by their
intended components, with only two of the 200 possible non-target loadings marginally exceeding .30. It was
found that the general subscale correlated .63 and .68 with the combined score from the six content domains for
men and women, respectively, and within the principal components analysis, items from the general subscale
did not account for any additional variance.
Criterion/Predictive
Cheng & Furnham (2002) reported a series of path analytic models in which total PEI scores significantly
and negatively predicted two Loneliness factors of intimacy with others ( β5/C0.33) and socializing with others
(β5/C0.28), but did not significantly predict happiness ( β5.18), after controlling for demographics, personality
dimensions measured by the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, school grades, and friendship.
Location
Shrauger, J.S., & Schohn, M. (1995). Self-confidence in college students: Conceptualization, measurement, and
behavioral implications. Assessment, 2 (3), 255 /C0278.
Results and Comments
The PEI has a number of desirable properties: The number of items is not excessive and the scale therefore
does not require a significant amount of time to complete; it lends itself to domain specific and domain general
assessment of confidence; and the scale appears to have demonstrated adequate reliability and validity thus far.
Furthermore, while this scale was designed for college populations, it seems reasonable to use the general sub-
scale as a short and reliable measure for any other population considering its strong relationship with the com-
bined content specific scores.
The research conducted with the PEI suggested that: (1) Self-reported confidence shared robust positive corre-
lations with positive and sociable self-report attributes and negative correlations with negative attributes; (2)
Athletic (physical) confidence diverged from confidence related to cognitive activities; and (3) Significant and
positive subscale intercorrelations were indicative of the existence of a general confidence factor.
PEI-LIKE ITEM
Indicate your degree of agreement with the following
statement:
Each question is accompanied by the following
rating scale:
A5Strongly agree
B5Mainly agreeC5Mainly Disagree
D5Strongly disagree
‘I feel more confident in my abilities than most
people.’
Note: Contrived example of an item from the General
Subscale.
Individual Learning Profile (ILP)
(Pulford & Sohal, 2006 ).
Variable
Pulford and Sohal defined confidence as the level at which individuals assess their own skill or ability.163 SELF-REPORT COGNITIVE CONFIDENCE SCALES
II. EMOTIONAL DISPOSITIONS