ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
Developing an Instrument for Assessing Self-Efficacy in Data Mining and Analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the continuous progress and penetration of automated data collection technology, enterprises and organizations are facing the problem of information overload. The demand for expertise in data mining and analysis is increasing. Self-efficacy is a pivotal construct that is significantly related to willingness and ability to perform a particular task. Thus, the objective of this study is to develop an instrument for assessing self-efficacy in data mining and analysis. An initial measurement list was developed based on the skills and abilities about executing data mining and analysis, and expert recommendations. A useful sample of 103 university students completed the online survey questionnaire. A 19-item four-factor model was extracted by exploratory factor analysis. Using the partial least squares-structural equation modeling technique (PLS-SEM), the model was cross-examined. The instrument showed satisfactory reliability and validity. The proposed instrument will be of value to researchers and practitioners in evaluating an individual's abilities and readiness in executing data mining and analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.