OVER VIEW OF THE MEASURES
Each of the first four scales was developed to assess a sense of confidence in one’s abilities /C0typically cogni-
tive in nature. However, they differ in important ways making their selection a relatively complex process.
The Personality Evaluation Inventory (PEI) assesses confidence in terms of a sense of competence/skill, across
domains important to college students. Unlike the other cognitive-based measures described in this chapter, the
PEI assesses confidence in a range of behaviors, such as academic, social, and athletic confidence. With the addi-
tion of a general confidence scale, it is probably the best self-report scale for assessing confidence across student
relevant behaviors. For this reason, the PEI is likely to be frequently used in future.
Assessing confidence in educational settings is an area of much interest, and the Individual Learning Profile
(ILP) has been constructed for this purpose. However, unlike the PEI, the ILP is dedicated to only assessing stu-
dent confidence in academic abilities. That is, the ILP is a much more specific measure when compared to the
PEI. This allows the ILP to tap deeper into skills concerned with academic outcomes such as achievement or
dropout rates. Unfortunately, despite its appeal and apparently robust internal structure, the ILP has not been
utilized much. We recommend the use of this scale in educational settings when the assessment of academic-
related competencies is of interest.
The Academic Behavioral Confidence Scale (ABC), as its name would suggest, assesses confidence in the ability to
conduct and plan behaviors relevant to academic success. It is notably shorter than the PEI or ILP and, by assessing
confidence in Grades, Studying, Verbalizing and Attendance, the ABC sits between the PEI and ILP in terms of the
range of behaviors it assesses. However, the scale’s overall validity, and particularly its reliability, do not compare
well. At this stage, we would recommend using the ABC in educational settings when a shorter scale is preferred.
Similar to the other three scales, the CAPA Confidence Inventory (CCI) is intended for use in educational settings.
However, unlike the others, the CCI is a component of a larger testing system /C0the CAPA System /C0intended to
help college students select college majors. In-line with its purpose, the CCI assesses confidence across Holland’s
(1997) six confidence themes with items targeting activities (e.g., ‘Write articles about pets or nature’) and/or
school subjects (e.g., ‘Pass a course in algebra’) across 27 vocational domains. The CCI is perhaps the broadest self-
report measure available in terms of its item content. This range of domains affords it great utility for applied pur-
poses. However, considering that much research has shown that confidence is a general construct, this range might
also lead to redundancy in certain cases. We would therefore recommend that the CCI be used as intended /C0for
educational/career guidance /C0and when fine-grained behavioral distinctions are important.
The following two scales assess confidence in physical or athletic abilities. Such confidence has largely been
studied as distinct from cognitive and academic confidence. Indeed, validation studies using the PEI and confi-
dence judgments described later suggest that this distinction is appropriate.
Unlike the other scales described here, the Trait-Robustness of Self-Confidence Inventory (TROSCI) was designed
to assess an athlete’s ‘ability to maintain confidence in the face of adversity’ ( Beattie et al., 2011 , p. 184). That is,
rather than assessing confidence in one’s skill, the emphasis is on the ability to maintain that confidence. The
scale’s novelty means that there is little to say in terms of its utility as yet. However, despite being very short,
results have found it to be internally stable, and the item content seems sound. Indeed, the item stems can be
used to build short and reliable questions to assess confidence in domains outside of athletic ability. We believe
that this scale will be of much use in the future.
The Trait Sport /C0Confidence Inventory (TSCI) is also a unique scale, as it assesses athletes’ sense of confidence in their
ability to perform successfully in their sport under adverse conditions, relative to the most confident athlete they
know. That is, it is the only scale that asks individuals to compare their own confidence to another person’s confi-
dence. A parallel state version is readily accessible, it has been around for a lot longer than the TROSCI, and it is used
frequently. We recommend using the TSCI when scales with well-documented psychometric properties are preferred.
The next scale, the Mathematics Self-efficacy Scale (MSS), consists of eight items from Question 31 of the PISA
(Programme for International Student Assessment ) 2003 Student Questionnaire. Each item assesses students’ self-
perceived ability to solve a maths problem. It differs from the above questionnaire measures in that it is item-
specific. However, it also differs from the judgment of accuracy measures (or online confidence) described below
in that participants are not asked to provide answers to any of the questions. Thus, the scale measures one’s
belief that she/he will be able to solve a particular problem. The MSS item stem provides a different, albeit
robust, approach to the study of confidence/self-efficacy.
The final section of this chapter covers online confidence judgments of accuracy and its calibration indices.
This is not a typical self-report scale, but rather a broadly applicable methodology for studying confidence and
its calibration that has been used extensively in research spanning numerous domains. The confidence rating that160 7. MEASURES OF THE TRAIT OF CONFIDENCE
II. EMOTIONAL DISPOSITIONS