Test Manual

Motivational Assertiveness

Test Developers:

Añonuevo, Justin Nori P.

Funtaniel, Jv G.

Lacaden, Shayra Clarice

Miralles, Julie

3C- Psychology

Prof. Karen Gail Ibañez, RPsy, RPm

 Table of Contents

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

Construct Definition 3

Domain Definition 3

Chapter 2: DEVELOPMENT OF MOTIVATIONAL ASSERTIVENESS

Domain Development 5

Generating Item Pool 8

Item Testing 13

Chapter 3: PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES

Reliability 18

Validity 20

Chapter 4: ADMINISTRATION, SCORING & INTERPRETATION

Administration of Test 21

Scoring 22

Interpretation 25

References 31

Appendix A 32

Appendix B 33

Appendix C 35
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION Mitamura (2017), the purpose of the present study was to
develop a measure of functional assertiveness, the Functional
In every action that people do, factors always influence
Assertiveness Scale (FAS). Functional assertiveness is a new
an individual to the action. These factors could be based on the
concept of assertiveness that represents a method of
self, or it could be from other people. The factors that drive a
appropriate self-expression.
person to exhibit the action impact the person's development
and can also shape an individual's behavior toward a certain In addition, the scale of Takashi Mitamura (2017) was
situation. In addition, those factors are not just made to used to measure the assertiveness of an individual in terms of
influence an individual's behavior, but it helps them identify communication. The scale supports the idea of the test
themselves with their personality. One good example is the developers. However, the scale of Takashi Mitamura (2017) is
students inside the school; in every performance, they are for communication, while the scale that the test developers
shown in every activity, there is always a reason behind it. wanted to measure is the performance of the students in school.
Therefore, the researchers named the test development
Moreover, the test developers are interested in knowing
Motivational Assertiveness because it is the assertiveness
the factors that contribute to the performance of every student
based on individual motivation. Also, the researchers came up
inside the classroom. The test developers want to understand
with this kind of test development because the researchers want
what drives the students to do a certain activity and what
to know how assertive the individual is in terms of their
motivates them to do the assignments or tasks. With that, the
motivation in performing tasks inside the school.
test developers research a scale that will further support the
idea of the test developers. Upon searching, the test developers
found a concept similar to what the test developers wanted to
measure. This scale is named Functional Assertiveness which
was developed by Takashi Mitamura (2017). According to
Motivational Assertiveness recognized, and be assertive objectively. This
It is the assertiveness of the individual based on their assertiveness refers to the person who is an achiever,
motivation. As an individual, there is a motivation that drives competitive, and goal oriented.
us to act and behave in a manner that is inclined to our beliefs
and norms we believed. This best explains that assertiveness is Confident
inclined to the person's motivations, whether intrapersonal This intrapersonal motivation is based on the
motivation, which is the factors within the individual, or individual's self-esteem, who believes in themselves as
interpersonal motivation, which is the external factors that capable of doing things. This assertiveness refers to the
influence the individual. person who is confident, brave, and has high self-
esteem.
Subdomains:
Interpersonal Motivation
Intrapersonal Motivation Interpersonal motivation pertains to the outside factors
Intrapersonal motivation refers to the motivations that influence the individual. External factors, like norms and
within the individual that affect their assertiveness. These peer pressure, make the individual adapt to the situation, which
internal factors, such as recognition and self-esteem, contribute leads them to refine their assertiveness.
to the individual's assertiveness.

Facets: Facets:
Achievement Advocate
This intrapersonal motivation is based on the This interpersonal motivation is based on the
individual's motivation to achieve their goal, be intention that by being assertive, they can lead, guide,
 or support those with low assertiveness. This and initiative in performing tasks that contribute to our
assertiveness refers to the agreeable, altruistic, and productivity. In developing "motivational assertiveness," we've
optimistic person. adopted the idea from the Functional Assertiveness Scale by
Takashi Mitamura (2017) that assertiveness is refined or
Responsibility affected by how a person behaves in some manner. With that,
This interpersonal motivation is based on the the test developers have developed that individuals have their
individual's belief that it is a norm in which society motivations for why they become assertive in certain
gives you a sense of responsibility and the need to act situations.
accordingly. This assertiveness refers to the person who
is obedient, compliant, and submissive. These motivations are based on the theory of
motivation, intrapersonal or interpersonal motivation. The
intrapersonal theory includes self-directed thoughts
CHAPTER II: DEVELOPMENT OF THE (particularly expectancy of success) and self-directed emotions
MOTIVATIONAL ASSERTIVENESS (pride, guilt, and shame). The interpersonal theory contains
beliefs about the responsibility of others and other-directed
Domain Development effects of anger and sympathy (Weiner, 2000). These theories
Assertiveness refers to being confident and able to state that individuals have different sources of motivation that
speak up or stand your point without being aggressive in drive them to behave in such a manner. The individuals refine
expressing your point of view. Assertive behavior reflects an their actions and behavior based on where they get their
individual's ability to stand up for their best interests without motivations.
being excessively anxious (Sutton, 2021). Our assertiveness Developing these scales would measure the level of
influences our actions, leading us to become more assertiveness of the individual and determine what type of
confident.
motivational assertiveness these individuals have. By knowing
the individual's assertiveness, one can see how they handle the
situation and what kind of intervention is suited for the
individual to become more productive.
Theories
In this scale, the test developers adapted the same
concept but focused more on the action of assertiveness. Based
on the concept of “Hiya,” where people refine their actions and
words with respect to the other person. It is a conscious and
sacrificial effort of self-control for the sake and welfare of the
other person, which inhibits self-assertion in a situation
(Lasquety-Reyes, 2016).
This explains that the values of a Filipino may affect the type
of assertion that the students have.
Plans Scoring
The test will initially be given to high school students in
public schools using pen and paper. The test administrators will
also use a Google form and send it to the test participants
through email and messenger. After collecting data from the
test-takers, the test administrators will utilize statistical
software called Javomi and excel to automatically determine
the total score, mean, and standard deviation.
All test results from the Motivational Assertiveness
Scale will be combined to determine the final score. The
average score will be calculated by averaging the raw results of
all test-takers.
ITEM FORMAT
In this Motivational Assertiveness scale, the format of
the item the test will be the Selected response Format, which is
a test item requiring test takers to select a response from a set
of alternative responses provided.
Response
The test takers will choose from the provided responses
that best fit their answers to the test items. The responses are
the following:
4 - Very True of Me
3 - True of Me
2 - Not True of Me
1 - Very Not True of Me
Generating Item Pool
The test items were developed by constructing and
conceptualizing the assertiveness in the context of the
Philippines. It also adapted some ideas from related scales that
measure assertiveness. The items in both Intrapersonal
Motivation and Interpersonal Motivation were developed
separately. The item pool originally consisted of 300 items;
150 in Intrapersonal Motivation and 150 in Interpersonal
Motivation. After conducting the test-retest reliability, it was
narrowed down to 63 items composed of 32 in Interpersonal
Motivation and 31 in Intrapersonal Motivation.
After the second run and knowing its internal
reliability, the 63 items were narrowed down to 50 items,
divided into four facets of the domains of the construct.
Intrapersonal Motivation
Achiever (10 items)
1. Sense of leadership is what I can be proud of.
7. I have a plan on how to move forward with my studies.
8. I always participate in class discussion.
29. I volunteer myself in the activities
31. I know how to bring people to my ideas and make them
acceptable.
34. I make sure that my outputs are the highest quality.
35. I enjoy going to school because it makes me feel closer to
achieving my goals.
40. I am easily able to cope with criticisms I hear.
59. I see myself as a competent student.
63. I know how to protest effectively in general, without
excessive aggression
Confident (13 items)
6. I am capable of participating.
13. I express myself clearly.
17. I am comfortable asking for help when I need it.
18. I can express my opinions calmly.
21. I believe that I am capable of participating.
42. I ask question politely to my teacher when there is a
confusion about the lesson.
44. I am not afraid to give my opinion.
51. I address problems directly without blame or judgment.
53. I feel comfortable standing up for myself.
54. I would rather express my feelings rather than repress them
for the comfort of others.
58. It is easy for me to confront my classmates.
60. It is easy for me to communicate with other people because
of my honesty.
62. I find it easy to take charge of a situation.
Interpersonal Motivation
Advocate (12 items)
3. I can make myself clear when I discuss the task with my
members.
9. It is easy to encourage my group mates to follow my
instructions.
10. I know how to convince others to accept my ideas.
15. I am always open to the suggestions and opinions of my
group mates.
19. Assisting my classmates in a task makes me happy.
24 I listen to other people’s suggestions, even if I disagree with
them.
30. I make sure that my group mates feel that we are all equal.
36. Whenever someone is reporting, show respect by listening
properly.
43. I respect all the thoughts of my group mates.
48. I am very conscious of others' opinions but will give mine,
too.
49. I praise my group mates when their work is correct so they
can feel encouraged.
52. I am open to having a conversation with opinionated group
mates.
Responsible (15)
4. I have the courage to tell my group mates to behave properly
during group work.
5. I can motivate my group mates to be on their best behavior
whenever I am the leader.
16. I take charge when my classmates assign me to.
20. I initiate brainstorming sessions so my group mates can
vocalize their ideas.
22. I make my group mates feel motivated about their outputs.
25. I allow my group mates to criticize my suggestions.
26. I am happy when my teacher likes me and my classmate’s
ideas.
33. I give my classmates a chance to work with their ideas. was still the same but it includes other schools in Metro
37. It is easy for me to persuade my group mates to spend more Manila, such as Taguig City University. The final sample (N =
time on o tasks. 302), which provided data for the reliability and factor analyses
39. I am very careful to avoid attacking someone's intelligence for the last item-testing study, was made up of a random
when I disagree with their ideas. sample.
41. I know how to distribute the task to my group mates.
45. When I need something from my classmate, I will ask them Table 1 shows the composition of the final sample, including
in a clear and confident way. gender and age.
46. I make sure that my criticism is constructive so my group
mates can consider it.
47. I am better on how I receive group ideas to enhance
collaboration.
57. I can tell my classmates when their behavior creates a
problem for me.

Item Testing
Sampling The Motivational Assertiveness was
developed mainly on participants from the University of
Makati (UMak). During the first item-testing studies,
participants from state tertiary institutions in Makati (N = 300) Item Analysis Item selection was guided by
participated. Expecting the completion of Motivational considerations of internal consistency reliability, content
Assertiveness, sampling for the for the last item testing study validity. Internal consistency was done to ensure that the items
are measuring the same underlying trait or characteristic. For
the content validity, it assesses whether the items adequately
cover all aspects or dimensions of the construct.
Item selection for reliability and content validity.
Software such as Jamovi, a statistical analysis software that
enables a specific type of item selection procedure that yields a
set of items from a larger pool. The item selection process in
Jamovi involved analyzing the internal consistent reliability of
different item combinations. The test developers create subsets
of items from the pool and assess their internal consistency
using statistical measures like Cronbach’s alpha. An interactive
procedure can be employed to eliminate items form a
measurement instrument. In each cycle of this procedure, the
item with the lowest item-total correlation, often considered the
“worst item, is removed. This removal process continues until
the increase in Cronbach’s alpha, a measure of internal
consistency, reaches a point where further elimination of items
no longer increases alpha. The aim is to retain the
interconnected items that yield the highest possible alpha from
the available item pool.
Although the procedure described above is structured, it
does have certain drawbacks. One major disadvantage is that it
relies on chance to achieve the maximum value of Cronbach’s
alpha. Consequently, there is a high probability of observing a
shrinkage in the reliability estimate when the procedure is
applied to future samples. The basis for deciding whether to
retain or delete an item in this procedure is its correlation with
the total score. However, it is important to note that an item’s
correlation with the total score can sometimes reach a high
value purely by chance or an item may appear to be strongly
related to the construct being measured simply due to random
variation in the sample.
Cronbach Alpha, McDonald’s Omega, Exploratory
Factor Analysis, Kaiser-Myer-Olkin (KMO), Item
Characteristics Curve, and Confirmatory Factor Analysis were
used to evaluate the overall quality of the items and the whole
test.
. information that is not shared with other items, proving that
they are well-written.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin. Both of the items exceeded the KMO's

minimum acceptable value of 0.5, indicating that their sample
adequacy is adequate.

Item Characteristics Curve. Both items are accepted,

demonstrating their ability to successfully classify people at
different levels of the measured construct.

Table 2 demonstrates that items 4 and 7 were accepted for the

following reasons:

Cronbach Alpha (if item dropped). The scale's internal

consistency may be impacted by eliminating items because it
has the same value as Cronbach’s Alpha.

McDonald's Omega (If item dropped). Omega values for both

items are high, indicating that the test's internal consistency
would be impacted if they were eliminated.

Exploratory Factor Analysis. Both of the items obtained a

factor loading value that is 0.3 above and was considered
acceptable.

Uniqueness. The value between 0.6 and 0.8 must be

considered to be "unique" to be considered for the item. The
items' acceptable values show that they include distinct
 Table 3 presents the total number of scaled items of the
consistency of alpha and omega on the first run of the test. It
shows that the value of alpha is ranging from 0.953 and the
omega 0.955.

CHAPTER III: PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES

Reliability

Internal Consistency Reliability

The internal consistency of the scale is a measure
wherein the items are intercorrelated with each other. Internal Table 4 presents the total number of the consistency of alpha
consistency is gauged through the use of Cronbach's Alpha and and omega on the second run of the test. It shows that the value
Omega, which are the means of possible reliability of items. of alpha is ranging from 0.946 and the omega is 0.947.
Alpha's is better when the sum is high, but an Alpha with a
high value will not be reliable since the scale is composed of
items that should be correlated.
Validity
Construct and content are the types of validity that the
test developers used in the construct:
Construct and Content Validity
The test developers adapt a construct, Assertiveness,
which focuses on the student's performance in school. After
adapting and creating the items, the test developers look for
three validators to validate the validity of the content. All 500
items were validated by the three Subject Matter Experts
(SMEs) majoring in testing. The validators validated the 500
items by the three options; retain, reject, and revise. Retain if
the items are appropriate for what the developers want to
measure and if the items are valid for the selected respondents.
Then the second option is to reject, in which the validators will
reject those items that have no connection to what the test is
measuring and if the items are not appropriate for the test
takers. The last option is the revision of the items. The
validators may choose the revise option; if the constructed item
is negative, it must be revised into a positive statement to fit in
the test construct.
Overall, the decision that was made by the validators in
validating the items was based on the construct and the
respondent’s ability to answer the item. Additionally, it is
essential to validate the items' questions because this would
confirm if the content of the test is valid and appropriate to the
respondents. Moreover, construct and content validity is a
crucial process in developing a construct.
CHAPTER IV: ADMINISTRATION, SCORING &
INTERPRETATION
Administration
In administering the test, this test would take 10-15
minutes for the test taker to finish the test. It is advised not to
give a specific time to the test taker to avoid time pressure for
the test taker. This test is a self-report test that requires that the
individual must be in a comfortable environment so that test
takers can focus on answering the test. The test administrator
must observe only to avoid influencing the test taker's answers.
 This test could also be administered online using
Google Forms, and it would take about 10-15 minutes.
Additionally, the test is less expensive to create because test-
takers do not require paper or pencils to complete the test. In
addition, the test takers can answer the test in their comfortable
place and chosen time that is convenient for them.
Scoring
For the scoring, the MAS use a 4-point Likert scale with a
0.75. The responses for the test are Very True of me, True of
me, Not True of me and Very Not True of me with a
corresponding value of 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively. The scoring
model for MAS is cumulative scoring which indicates that the
highest score is the trait that the individual manifest
Type of Motivational Assertiveness
In getting the motivational assertiveness, compute the total
standard score for Interpersonal Motivation by adding the
standard score of Achiever and Confident, and the total score
for Intrapersonal Motivation by adding the standard score of
Responsible and Advocate. The highest total standard score
determines what type of motivational assertiveness the
individual has.
Type of Assertiveness
For the type of assertiveness, add the total raw score for each
facet. After getting the sum, convert the raw score into standard
score to determine which type of assertiveness is more
dominant in the individual’s trait.

Table 5 presents the likert scale and its value. Response Value
Level of Assertiveness Very True of me 4
For the level of assertiveness, first is to get the sum of the total True of me 3
standard score of the interpersonal motivation and
Not True of me 2
intrapersonal motivation. There is a corresponding level for
Very Not True of me 1
each total score
 Level of Assertiveness Range of Total Standard Score

High Assertiveness 85 - 100

Average Assertiveness 65-84

Low Assertiveness 64 and below

Interpretation

Table 6 presents the level of assertiveness and its

corresponding score.
High Assertive people are the people who have a greater sense themselves responsible for other people. They take
of initiative and pride. They are very determined with their responsibility for the group and make decisions for the rest of
own goals and stand up for their own views and opinions. They the group and set aside his/her own personal decision. They are
are not easily swayed by other people and focus more on how motivated by other people seeing themselves as they need to
he/she views self. They are very critical when it comes to prove themselves from others.
decision making and are objective in their performance. They Intrapersonal Motivation
are often misunderstood by other people for their objectivity People who are high in intrapersonal motivation are the
and seen as lack of consideration for others. Average Assertive people who get motivation from themselves. They strive for
people balance their objectivity for self and others. They are something because they know that it is the best thing for them.
often seen as good leaders for their sense of compassion. They They take charge of the situation because they want it to be
take charge of the situation especially when no one is capable aligned with their goals. They decide what they think are the
of doing so. They focus on their goals and the group's goal and best and rarely consider the views of others.
do his/her best to attain both. Low Assertive people are often
shy people. They usually conform in a group and rarely initiate Standard Achiever Confident Advocate Responsible
activities. They rely on others' views most of the time getting Score
easily swayed by other people. They lack confidence and are 25 40 50-52 48 58-60
afraid of disappointment.
24 38-39 47-49 45-47 55-57

23 36-37 44-46 42-44 52-54

Interpersonal Motivation 22 34-35 41-43 39-41 49-51

People who are high in interpersonal motivation are the 21 32-33 38-40 36-38 46-48
people who get motivation from others. They often see 20 30-31 35-37 33-35 43-45
 19 28-29 32-34 30-32 40-42 situation because they feel obligated to do so. They are very
strict when it comes to group decisions.
18 26-27 29-31 27-29 37-39

17 24-25 26-28 24-26 34-36 Achiever

16 22-23 23-25 21-23 31-33 Achievers are the people who take charge for

15 20-21 20–22 18-20 28-30 achievement. They strive to be successful in their work and
cautious of failures. They also seek recognition for their work,
14 18-19 17-19 15-17 25-27
and want to be acknowledged for their hard work.
13 <18 <17 <15 <25

Advocate
Confident
Advocate people are considerate of others. They are
Confident people are the ones who have a high self-
compassionate when it comes to decision making. They take
esteem. They take charge because they see themselves capable
charge of the situation and promote equality for the group.
of handling the situation. They often speak up their views and
They share their goals and decisions with others to form a
opinions without being ashamed even if they oppose others’
whole decision as a group.
views.

Responsible
Responsible people see themselves as they are
responsible for other people. They make decisions that are
better for the majority of the group. They take charge of the
REFERENCES:
Mitamura, T. (2017). Developing the Functional Assertiveness
Scale: Measuring Dimensions of Objective
Effectiveness and Pragmatic Politeness. Wiley Online
Library.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jpr.12
185#:~:text=Functional%20assertiveness%20is%20def
ined%20as%20interpersonal%20communication%20th
at,by%20the%20listener%20%28Mitamura%20%26%
20Tanaka%E2%80%90Matsumi%2C%202010%2C%
202010c%29
Sutton, J. (2021). What Is Assertiveness in Psychology? 5
Practical Examples. Positive Psychology.
https://positivepsychology.com/assertiveness-
psychology/
Weiner, B. (2000). Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Theories of
Motivation from an Attributional Perspective. Springer
Link.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:100901753
2121
APPENDICES:
Appendix A: College Norms
As discussed previously in Chapter 2, the college
sample is made up of 248 students from the University of
Makati and 54 students from Taguig City University. The final
reliability and factor structure analyses were conducted on a
composite sample that consisted of two specific groups. These
groups were included in the analysis to ensure a representative
and comprehensive evaluation of the data. The composite
sample used for the reliability and factor structure analyses
comprised two distinct groups. These groups were integral to
the study as they allowed for a thorough examination and
understanding of the data. The mean age of the sample is 21.5
and its standard deviation is 2.29. Of the total sample of 302,
80 percent were female, 20 were male. Following is the age
distribution of the college sample. As can be seen, about 83.78
percent were aged 19 to 21.
Appendix B: Sample Protocol & Interpretation

INTERPRETATION:

J.R.M., a 19-year-old student from the University of

Makati, has average assertiveness evidence on the test
(Motivational Assertiveness) that he answered, with a total
score of 81. He has a high standard score on interpersonal
motivation, which is an advocate; it means that he is
considerate of others. He is compassionate in decision-making,
always takes charge of the situation, and promotes equality for
the group. Also, he shares his goals and decisions with others
to form a collaborative decision. J.R.M scored high (83) in
Interpersonal Motivation, meaning he often sees himself as
responsible for other people.
Appendix C: About the Test Developers
Justin Nori P. Anonuevo
Justin Nori P. Anonuevo is a 21-years-old man. He is a
third-year college student studying BS in Psychology at the
University of Makati. He received several academic awards
from junior high school until college and has been a consistent
honor student. He also did a part-time job as an encoder in a
company. Aside from studying psychology, he was planning
to enroll in the field of doctors to explore the medical health
field further. For further queries, here is the email that you may
contact: anonuevonorij@gmail.com / 09474639928
Jv G. Funtaniel
Jv G. Funtaniel, 21-years-old. He is a third year college
student studying BS Psychology at the University of Makati.
He is affiliated with Peer Facilitation Association and currently
running as Vice President Internal. He received academic
excellence awards and has been a consistent honor student
since junior high school until college. Beyond his academic
achievements, Jv is committed and draws inspiration from his
experience. For further queries, here is the email that you may
contact: jvfuntaniel@gmail.com/ 09555421145
Clarice Shayra Lacaden
Clarice Shayra Lacaden, 20 years of age. She is a third
year college student studying BS Psychology at University of
Makati. She is a scholar of a known foundation in the
Philippines named LCCKFI (Luis Co Chi Kiat Foundation).
Also, she has been a consistent Dean’s Lister since junior high
school until college. She is currently a freelance writer as her
part-time job. For further queries, here is the email that you
may contact: clariceshayralacaden@gmail.com/ 095649987902
Julie Miralles
Julie Miralles is a 21-year-old woman. She is a third-
year college student majoring in BS Psychology at the
University of Makati. She has been a consistent Dean’s Lister
since junior high school until college. She is also a working
student and supports her own expenses while in school. She
envisioned herself working as a psychologist in the future. For
further queries, here is the email that you may contact:
juliemrlls@gmail.com/ 09997766521
Appendix D: Request Letter for Takashi Mitamura
The test developers sent a letter to Takashi Mitamura's
email addressing whether the test developers could adapt his
idea to his Functional Assertiveness. However, we did not
receive any response from him. Also, even though we would
like to email the University where Takashi Mitamura is
teaching, there is no email address of the University indicated
in his contact.

Attached below is the proof of the email of the test

developers that was sent to Mr. Takashi Mitamura, together
with the letter signed by the test developer leader.