Led On Line
Presentazione - About us
Novita' - What's new
Lededizioni Home Page Ricerca - Search
Catalogo - Catalogue
Per contattarci - Contacts
Per gli Autori - For the Authors
Statistiche - Statistics
Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy

The Development and Psychometric Properties of the «Self-Regulated Knowledge Scale - University» (SRKS-U)

Sara Manganelli, Fabio Alivernini, Luca Mallia, Valeria Biasi


Cognitive self-regulation refers to the mental processes that students adopt with the aim of adapting and changing their processes of cognition and that can lead to positive results in terms of learning. The purpose of the present study was to develop a short scale with sound psychometric properties in order to measure self-regulated knowledge in university students. The scale was designed on the basis of the Self-Regulated Learning theoretical framework (Pintrich, 2004) as well as the results of previous studies investigating students’ cognitive self-regulation. The «Self-Regulated Knowledge Scale - University» (SRKS-U) was made up of five subscales, each one intended to measure one of the following cognitive processes: knowledge networking, knowledge extraction, knowledge practice, knowledge critique, and knowledge monitoring. The psychometric properties of the scale were tested on a sample of 2.209 Italian university students (average age = 22.6 years; SD = 6.14; 67% female) to ascertain its reliability (internal consistency) and factorial structure (using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis). A multigroup analysis was employed to verify the measurement invariance of SRKS-U across gender. The results proved the good internal consistency of the scale, confirmed its theoretical structure, and demonstrated its configural, metric and scalar invariance across gender. Given its brevity and its good psychometric properties, the SRKS-U can be usefully employed in research programs which aim to investigate self-regulated knowledge as well as in evaluation programs as a screening instrument to provide information that can be used for developing targeted interventions in order to enhance students’ self-regulation of learning.


Cognitive strategies; Key competencies; Learning to learn; Self-Regualted Learning; Validity; Auto-regolazione dell’apprendimento; Competenze chiave; Imparare ad apprendere; Strategie cognitive; Validità

Full Text:



Alivernini, F., & Lucidi, F. (2011). Relationship between social context, self-efficacy, motivation, academic achievement, and intention to drop out of high school: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(4), 241-252.

Alivernini, F., Lucidi, F., & Manganelli, S. (2012). The validation of a scale measuring teaching styles in the Italian context. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1487-1490.

Alivernini, F., & Manganelli, S. (2015). Country, school and students factors associated with extreme levels of science literacy across 25 countries. International Journal of Science Education, 37(12), 1992-2012.

Barbaranelli, C., & Natali, E. (2005). I test psicologici: teorie e modelli psicometrici. Roma: Carocci.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.

Biasi, V., Domenici, G., Capobianco, R., Patrizi, N. (2014). Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale: Adaptation and validation in Italy. Journal of Educational Cultural and Psychological Studies, 10, 485-509.

Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149.

Cera, R., Mancini, M., & Antonietti, A. (2013). Relationship between metacognition, self-efficacy and self-regulation in learning. Journal of Educational Cultural and Psychological Studies, 7, 115-141.

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233-255.

Cornoldi, C. (1995). Metacognizione e apprendimento. Bologna: il Mulino.

Crede, M., & Phillips, L. A. (2011). A meta-analytic review of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 337-346.

De Marco, B., & Albanese, O. (2009). Le competenze autoregolative dell’attività di studio in comunità virtuali. QWERTY, 4(2), 123-139.

Diseth, A., Pallesen, S., Brunborg, G. S., & Larsen, S. (2010). Academic achievement among first semester undergraduate psychology students: The role of course experience, effort, motives and learning strategies. Higher Education, 59(3), 335-352.

Dowson, M., & McInerney, D. M. (2004). The development and validation of the goal orientation and learning strategy survey (GOAL-S). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(2), 290-310.

Entwistle, N., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual bases of study strategy inventories. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 325-345.

Heikkila, A., Niemivirta, M., Nieminen J., & Lonka, K. (2011). Interrelations among university students’ approaches to learning, regulation of learning, and cognitive and attributional strategies: A person oriented approach. Higher Education, 61, 513-529.

Hofer, B. K., & Shirley, L. Y. (2003). Theaching self-regulated learning through a ≪learning to learn≫ cours. Teaching of Psychology, 30(1), 30-33.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User’s guide. Chicago: Scientific Software.

La Rocca, C., Margottini, M., & Capobianco, R. (2014). Ambienti digitali per lo sviluppo delle competenze trasversali nella didattica universitaria. Journal of Educational Cultural and Psychological Studies, 10, 245-283.

Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (1998-2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.

Pellerey, M. (1996). Questionario sulle strategie di studio. Roma: LAS – Libreria Ateneo Salesiano.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. and Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of selfregulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual Framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.

Pintrich, P. R., & V. De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.

Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 353-387.

Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. Journal of Educational Research, 99, 323-337.

Sizoo, S., Malhotra, N., & Bearson, J. (2003). A gender-based comparison of the learning strategies of adult business students. College Student Journal, 37(1), 103-110.

Socha, A., & Sigler, E. A. (2014). Exploring and ≪reconciling≫ the factor structure for the Revised Two-factor Study Process Questionnaire. Learning and Individual Differences, 31, 43-50.

Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180.

Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST: A reconceptualisation of the approaches to studying inventory. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning: Improving students as learners. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.

Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(4), 4-70.

Van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 486-492.

Vermunt, J. D. (1998). The regulation of constructive learning processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 149-171.

Weinstein, C. E., & Palmer, D. R. (2002). Learning and study strategies inventory user manual. H&H Publishing Company, Inc.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7358/ecps-2015-012-mang


Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS)
Registered by Tribunale di Milano (19/05/2010 n. 278)
Online ISSN 2037-7924 - Print ISSN 2037-7932

Research Laboratory on Didactics and Evaluation - Department of Education - "Roma Tre" University

Executive Editor: Gaetano Domenici - Managing  Editor: Valeria Biasci
Editorial Board: Giuditta Alessandrini - Eleftheria Argyropoulou - Massimo Baldacci - Joao Barroso - Richard Bates - Christofer Bezzina - Paolo Bonaiuto - Lucia Boncori - Pietro Boscolo - Sara Bubb  - Carlo Felice Casula - Jean-Émile Charlier - Lucia Chiappetta Cajola - Carmela Covato - Jean-Louis Derouet - Peter Early - Franco Frabboni - Constance Katz - James Levin - Pietro Lucisano  - Roberto Maragliano - Romuald Normand - Michael Osborne - Donatella Palomba - Michele Pellerey - Clotilde Pontecorvo - Vitaly V. Rubtzov - Jaap Scheerens - Noah W. Sobe - Francesco Susi - Giuseppe Spadafora - Pat Thomson
Editorial Staff: Fabio Alivernini - Guido Benvenuto - Anna Maria Ciraci - Massimiliano Fiorucci - Luca Mallia - Massimo Margottini - Giovanni Moretti - Carla Roverselli 
Editorial Secretary:
Nazarena Patrizi