{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03139612558450234, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008016032064128256, 'mean_word_length': 5.8090909090909095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Multidimensional Structure or Wording Effect? Reexamination of the Factor Structure of the Chinese General Self-Efficacy Scale

Abstract Despite overwhelming evidence supporting the unidimensional structure of the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES) across various language adaptations, a multifactor structure has frequently been identified for the Chinese version (GSES–C), leading some researchers to conclude that the GSES–C is multidimensional. However, the multifactor structure might derive from common method bias, such as wording effects. To test this postulation, a sample of 1,515 college students completed the GSES–C, then 507 of the sample additionally completed 3 other criteria scales. The research approach included logistic-semantic analysis, exploratory factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis of single-factor and bifactor models. The study yielded 3 main findings: (a) There were 2 common wording factors underlying the GSES–C: “uncertain situation wording” and “hypothetical wording.” (b) Although the 1-factor model of the GSES–C did not fit the data, unidimensionality was supported when the 2 wording factors were controlled for in a bifactor model, indicating that the wording effects emerged. (c) The correlation coefficients between the general factor and external positive constructs were substantially underestimated if the wording effects were not controlled. The reasons for and the meanings of the wording effects underlying the GSES–C are also discussed.