Cited by 302Education, Achievement, and GiftednessCareer Development and DiversityEngineering Education and Curriculum Development

Measuring Undergraduate Students' Engineering Self‐Efficacy: A Validation Study

Mamaril, Natasha A., Usher, Ellen L., Li, Caihong R., Economy, D. Ross, Kennedy, Marian S.·2016·Journal of Engineering Education

Abstract

Background: Self‐efficacy has been shown to be positively related to undergraduate engineering students' achievement. Designing self‐efficacy measures to assess the multifaceted skills required of engineers could improve the predictive relationship between efficacy beliefs and performance. Purpose: This study evaluates the factor structure, validity, and reliability of general and skill‐specific engineering self‐efficacy measures created for use with undergraduate engineering students. Design/Method: Self‐efficacy items used for the measures were created and adapted from those used previously. Survey responses were collected from engineering students attending two southeastern universities. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to determine factor structure. Multiple regression analyses examined the relationship between engineering self‐efficacy and academic achievement and intent to persist in engineering, both uniquely and when considering other motivation variables. Results: Factor analysis results suggested two self‐efficacy scales. The General Engineering Self‐Efficacy Scale is unidimensional; the Engineering Skills Self‐Efficacy Scale is multidimensional with three factors representing experimental skills, tinkering skills, and design. General engineering self‐efficacy predicted academic achievement, even when prior achievement was controlled. Students' intrinsic value in engineering predicted their intentions to persist in the engineering profession. Conclusions: We found evidence for the reliability, validity, and predictive utility of the engineering self‐efficacy scales. These scales can be used to assess undergraduate students' beliefs in their capabilities to perform tasks in their coursework and future roles as engineers and to investigate the association between self‐efficacy and academic outcomes of interest.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jee.20121

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 154 · Cited by 302

Authors
Mamaril, N. A., Usher, E. L., Li, C. R., Economy, D. R., & Kennedy, M. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • Clemson University (US)
Venue
Journal of Engineering Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-04
Volume
105
Issue
2
Pages
366-395
ISSN
  • 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-9830
OpenAlex
W101591081
Cited by
302
References
154
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 89 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3
FWCI
33.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Engineering Education (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (EEC-1240327, EEC-1240328)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Engineering Education and Curriculum Development
Keywords
engineering self-efficacy, undergraduate engineering students, factor structure, academic performance, design skills, experimental skills, student motivation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review