A.4. Chinese version of character attachment scale 角色依附量表說明：
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Appendix B (The inventory of Perceived mastery experience, PME)
B.1. Original questions
The PME, developed by the researcher and Yu-chu Yeh, was employed to measure the participants’ perceived mastery experiences after playing the game in this study. The PME was a 6-point Likert scale with response options raining from “totally disagree” to “totally agree”. With a total of 10 items, the PME included two factors: enhancement of ability (5 items) and enhancement of confidence (5 items). The test items included statements such as
“Through playing this game, my critical thinking ability towards this policy has been
enhanced”, and “After playing this game, I find it is not difficult to understand this policy as I imaged before”.
B.2. The processes of scale development B.2.1. Construct validity
One PhD student from linguistics department, one PhD student from computer science department, and one professor educational psychology department were asked for expert validity. Some questions were revised for the wordings.
B.2.2. Scoring
It was a 6-point Likert scale with response options ranging from “totally disagree” to
“totally agree” which represented 1 point to 6 points. The higher the sum of the scores, the higher perceived mastery experience of the respondent.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
B.3. Questions deletions and selections B.3.1. Item analysis
Total ten questions were developed according to the literature review for pretest perceived mastery experience scale (PME). High score group and low score group was divided by using 27% of the total 113 participants as the cutting point. Independent t test was used to test the difference between high score and low score group. The results showed that CR of every item was ranged from 4.668 to 10.473. In another word, all the CR values were greater than 3.0, ps < .001. It suggested that all the items can be discriminated from each other.
Besides, the correlations between each item and total scores were higher than.545. Therefore, ten items were kept for the next step analysis.
B.3.2. Exploratory factor analysis
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to test the construct validity of the scale of perceived mastery experience. The results showed that KMO was .809 which suggested the sample could be representative of the entire population and therefore it was suitable for factor analysis. Besides, the value of Bartlett’s test of sphericity was 516.391, ps<.001 which suggested that the item correlations of PME could be used for factor extraction. Following this, principle axis factor (PAF) and direct oblmin rotation were used for factor extraction.
This study decided to extract three factors according to the literature review. First result showed that the factor loading of item 1 was greater than .35 across two different factors.
Item one was deleted for the second EFA analysis. The second results showed that KMO was .805, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was 417.329, ps <.001. PAF and direct oblmin rotation were used again for factor extraction. Meaningful factors were selected according to
Eigenvalues over 1 and the screen test. Two factors were extracted from the result. All items’
factor loading were in the range of .525 and .920. The cumulative variance explained of two
‧
factors were 61% (See Table 1). Two factors were named “enhancement of ability (5items) and enhancement of confidence (4items). Besides, the correlations between these two factors was .384, ps < .001 and the correlations between each factors and total scores were .816 and .847, ps < .001(See Table 2). It suggested that the quality of the construct validity of PME scale was good.
Table B1
Pattern Matrix of Perceived Mastery Experience
Questions Factor loading Communalities
1 2
1. After playing this game, I find it is not so difficult to understand this policy as I thought before. (Original item 8)
.920 .804
2. After playing this game, I find it is not so difficult to participate in political discussions as I thought before.(Original
item 9) .910 .849
3. After playing this game, I find it is not so difficult to join political actions about this policy as I thought before. (Original
item 10) .852 .789
4. When playing the game, my thinking has been changed from “It is impossible to influence the government’s policy for common people like me” to” Even when it comes to common people like me, as long as trying hard, everyone can influence the government’s policy.
(Original item 7)
.680
.455 5. By playing this game, my expression
ability about this policy has been enhanced.(Original item 3)
.822 .669
‧
6. By playing this game, my critical thinking ability about this policy has been enhanced. (Original item 2)
.780 .579
7. By playing this game, my action ability about this policy has been enhanced.
(Original item 4) .722 .504
8. When playing this game, I try to think about how to apply the response from the game to the policy-relevant issues in real
life. (Original item 6) .661 .435
9. When playing this game, I try to play according to the avatar’s behaviors and performances
(Original item 5) .525 .378
Eigenvalues 3.776 1.688
%of variance explained 41.954 18.750
%of cumulative variance explained 41.954 60.704
Table B2
Correlations of different components of perceived mastery experience
Ability Confidence Total
After exploratory factor analysis, nine questions were left for reliability analysis.
The Cronbach’s α coefficients was .821 for PME. It was .751 and .864 for enhancement of ability (5items) and enhancement of confidence (4items), respectively. Furthermore, the corrected item-total correlations of all the items were between .416 to .692. Among these, the corrected item-total correlations of enhancement of ability were between .416 to .528;
‧
The corrected item-total correlations of enhancement of confidence were between to .447 to .692(See Table 3).
Table B3
Corrected Item-Total Correlations and Cronbach's α of Perceived Mastery Experience Corrected
Item-Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted Factor: Ability enhancement (Cronbach’s α=.751)
1. By playing this game, my critical thinking ability about this policy has been enhanced.
.449 .811
2. By playing this game, my expression ability about this
policy has been enhanced. .528 .803
3. By playing this game, my action ability about this
policy has been enhanced. .424 .814
4. When playing this game, I try to play according to the
avatar’s behaviors and performances. .456 .811
5. When playing this game, I try to think about how to apply the response from the game to the policy-relevant issues in real life.
.416 .815
Factor: Confidence enhancement (Cronbach’s α=.864) 6. When playing the game, my thinking has been changed from “It is impossible to influence the government’s policy for common people like me” to”
Even when it comes to common people like me, as long as trying hard, everyone can influence the government’s policy.
.447 .813
7. After playing this game, I find it is not so difficult to
understand this policy as I thought before. .608 .792
8. After playing this game, I find it is not so difficult to
participate in political discussions as I thought before. .688 .780 9. After playing this game, I find it is not so difficult to
join political actions about this policy as I thought before.
.692 .783
Total Cronbach’s ‘s α= .821
‧
B.4. Chinese version of perceived mastery experience scale
感知的精熟經驗量表說明：
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Appendix C (The inventory of internal political efficacy, IPE)
C.1. Original questions
Internal political efficacy was measured by a domain specific efficacy related to carbon emissions trade issues in this study. The IPE, developed by the researcher and Yu-chu Yeh, was employed to measure the participants’ internal efficacy of carbon emissions trade issues.
The IPE was a 6-point Likert scale with response options raining from “totally disagree” to
“totally agree”. With a total of 8 items, the IPE included two factors: information access and confidence in ability (4 items) and interest and involvement (4 items). The test items
included statements such as “I initiative to access information related to carbon trade emission issues in everyday life”, and “I have the ability to participate in discussions of the carbon trade emission issues.”
C.2. The processes of scale development C.2.1. Construct validity
One PhD student from linguistics department, one PhD student from computer science department, and one professor educational psychology department were asked for expert validity. Some questions were revised for the wordings.
C.2.2. Scoring
It was a 6-point Likert scale with response options ranging from “totally disagree” to
“totally agree” which represented 1 point to 6 points. The higher the sum of the scores, the higher internal political efficacy of the respondent.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
C.3. Questions deletions and selections C.3.1. Item analysis
Total eight questions were developed for pretest internal political efficacy (IPE). High score group and low score group was divided by using 27% of the total 113 participants as the cutting point. Independent t test was employed to test the difference between high score and low score group. The result showed that CR of every item was in the range of
4.381~10.423. In another word, all the CR values were greater than 3.0, ps 1< .00. Besides, except item 9, the correlations between each item and total scores were higher than .628, ps<.001. The correlation between item 9 and the total scores were -2.52, p<.05. It suggested that the scores of high score group can be discriminated from those of low score group.
Therefore, eight items were kept for the next step analysis.
C.3.2 Exploratory factor analysis
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)was used to test the construct validity of the scale of internal political efficacy. The results showed that KMO was .828 which suggested the sample could be representative of the entire population and therefore it was suitable for factor analysis.
Besides, the value of Bartlett’s test of sphericity was 417.729, ps <.001 which suggested that the item correlations of PME could be used for factor extraction. Following this, principle axis factor (PAF) and direct oblmin rotation were used for factor extraction. This study decided to extract two factors according to the literature review. First result showed that the factor loading of all the items were greater than .35 and all of values greater than .35 were just in of the factors.
After reliability analysis was conducted, item nine was deleted for the second EFA analysis. The second results showed that KMO was .826, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was 374.546, ps<.001. PAF and direct oblmin rotation were used again for factor extraction.
‧
Meaningful factors were selected according to Eigenvalues over 1 and the screen test. Two factors were extracted from the result. All items’ factor loading were in the range of .619 and .956. The cumulative variance explained of two factors were 71%. Two factors were named “information access and confidence” (4items) and “interest and involvement”
(3items) (See Table 1). Besides, the correlations between two factors were .585, ps<.001, and the correlations between each factors and total scores were .920 and .856, ps<.001(See Table 2).
Table C1
Pattern Matrix of Internal Political Efficacy
Questions Factor loading Communalities
1 2
1. I am better informed about carbon emission trade
issues than most people. (Original item 3) .922 .754
2. I take initiative to access information related to carbon emission trade issues in my everyday life.
(Original item 1) .840 .747.
3. I understand carbon trade emission issues quite
well. (Original item 6) .823 .689
4. I have the ability to participate in the discussion
about carbon emission trade issues. (Original item 2 .671 .702 5. I am willing to spend time thinking carbon
emission trade issues. (Original item 8) .956 .815
6. I am interested in carbon emission trade
issues.(Original item 4) .826 .724
7. I can see some problems in the discussions about
carbon emission trade issues(Original item 7) .619 .568.
Eigenvalues 3.935 1.065
%of variance explained 56.219 15.209
%of cumulative variance explained 56.219 71.428
‧
Correlations of Different Components of Internal Political Efficacy Information access
and confidence
After the first time exploratory factor analysis, eight questions were left for reliability analysis. The Cronbach’s α coefficient was .69 for IPE. However, if item nine was delete, Cronbach’s α would be enhanced to .868. In this step, item nine was deleted for the second time analysis. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted again and after that, seven
questions were left for reliability analysis. The final result of Cronbach’s α coefficient was .868 for IPE. It was .863 and .777 for “information access and confidence in ability”
(4items) and “interest and involvement” (3items). Furthermore, the corrected item-total correlations of all the items were between .573 to .738. Among these, the corrected item-total correlations of information access were between .689 to .749 ; The corrected item-item-total correlations of interest and involvement were between to .532 to .697(See Table 3).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Table C3
Corrected Item-Total Correlations and Cronbach's α of Internal Political Efficacy
Factors and questions Corrected
Item-Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted Factor: Information access and confidence (Cronbach’s
α=.863)
1. I take initiative to access information related to carbon emission trade issues in my everyday life.
.707 .842
2. I have the ability to participate in the discussion about
carbon emission trade issues. .738 .836
3. I am better informed about carbon emission trade issues
than most people. .628 .852
4. I understand carbon trade emission issues quite well. .651 .849 Factor: Interest and involvement (Cronbach’s α=.777)
5. I am interested in carbon emission trade issues .613 .854
6. I can see some problems in the discussions about carbon
emission trade issues .598 .855
7. I am willing to spend time thinking carbon emission trade
issues. .573 .859
Total Cronbach’s ‘s α=.868
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
C.4. Chinese version of internal political efficacy scale 碳排放稅量表說明：
下面問題主要是要瞭解您對於碳稅與碳交易相關議題之內部效能感。碳稅則係 針對一般常見能源產品如 油品、煤炭、電力及天然氣等，以其碳含量為基準，所 課徵之稅目。碳交易是1997年《京都議定書》中，為促進全球減少溫室氣體排放，
以國際公法作為依據的溫室氣體排減量交易。管理當局必須先訂立二氧化碳總量管 制目標（cap），再將二氧化碳排放權以核配（或拍賣）的方式發 放給排放源。
您的個人資料，我們會絕對保密。請根據您的實際狀況，將適當的號碼圈選起來。
請記得每一題都要作答。
題號 問 題 非 相 有 有 相 非
常 當 點 點 當 常 不 不 不 同 同 同 同 同 同 意 意 意 意 意 意
1. 我平常會主動接觸碳稅與碳交易議題之相關資訊。 1 2 3 4 5 6
2. 我有能力討論和參與碳稅與碳交易議題。 1 2 3 4 5 6
3. 我在關於碳稅與碳交易議題上比大多數人消息靈通。 1 2 3 4 5 6
4. 我對於碳稅與碳交易議題感興趣。 1 2 3 4 5 6
5. 我對於碳稅與碳交易議題有相當的了解。 1 2 3 4 5 6
6. 我能夠從一些碳稅和碳交易的討論，看出背後的問題。 1 2 3 4 5 6
7. 我願意花時間思考碳稅與碳交易議題。 1 2 3 4 5 6
‧
Appendix D (The questions of the game in Chinese)
分成三大題型，題型一為關於碳排放稅本身，題型二為碳排放稅之影響，題型三為碳