Social Responsibility Inventory

Abstract

The Social Responsibility Inventory (SRI) is a specialized student survey developed in 1992 by Jeffrey Howard and Wilbert McKeachie. This instrument is primarily designed to measure college students’ social and political beliefs, values, and attitudes related to civic engagement and global awareness. Comprising approximately 15 core items, plus a supplementary post-test section, the SRI utilizes a Likert scale format to assess both the personal importance students place on various social issues and their general attitudes toward Social Responsibility. Its main application is as a pre-post test design tool, allowing academic programs and mentoring initiatives to evaluate their impact on students’ developing ethical orientation and commitment to social justice.

Keywords

Social responsibility, student values, political beliefs, civic engagement, altruism, course evaluation, college students, pre-post test, social justice, personal attitudes.

Authors

Jeffrey Howard, Wilbert McKeachie, Gregory Markus

Purpose

The core purpose of the Social Responsibility Inventory is to provide a quantitative measure of shifts in students’ social and political values, particularly those changes induced by participation in specific college courses or educational programs. It serves as an internal evaluation tool for educational institutions seeking to determine if their curriculum effectively fosters a greater sense of civic duty and commitment to equity among their student body.

The instrument is structured to capture three distinct facets of social orientation: the personal value placed on socially responsible behaviors (Part I), the general attitudes regarding an individual’s capacity to effect change (Part II), and, specifically in the post-test iteration (Part III), the perceived impact of the course on strengthening these intentions and beliefs. This detailed structure allows educators to pinpoint areas where their intervention has been most effective.

Construct

The Social Responsibility Inventory measures a complex, multi-faceted construct rooted in applied ethics and social psychology. It focuses on the individual’s internalized sense of obligation toward the greater good, often termed Social Responsibility. This construct is operationalized through several subdomains:

• Value Orientation: Measuring the perceived importance of altruistic goals, such as working toward equal opportunity, community involvement, and giving to charity, relative to personal financial success.
• Attitudinal Beliefs: Assessing generalized outlooks on social issues, including beliefs about social justice, the impact of external forces (like poverty), and the capacity of individuals to make a difference in the world.
• Programmatic Impact (Post-Test): Quantifying the degree to which a specific course strengthened intentions related to service, charity, social justice advocacy, and tolerance.

Validity

While the available documentation highlights the practical application and face validity of the scale—specifically its utility in educational settings for measuring intervention effects—detailed information concerning its empirical Psychometric properties, such as construct or criterion validity, is not explicitly provided in the summary. The validity of the SRI rests largely on its direct alignment with established educational outcomes related to civic engagement and moral development, making it a highly relevant measure for program evaluation. Researchers utilizing the SRI should consult primary academic publications by Howard, McKeachie, and Markus for comprehensive validation studies.

Reliability

Specific reliability coefficients, such as internal consistency (e.g., Cronbach’s Alpha) or test-retest reliability, are not detailed in the summarized content. Given the instrument’s design as a change-detection tool (pre-post testing), high levels of reliability are essential for accurately attributing observed changes in scores to the educational intervention rather than measurement error. Users are advised to seek out the original technical manual or academic papers to confirm the instrument’s statistical reliability across diverse student populations.

Factor Analysis

The scale is conceptually divided into three distinct parts, suggesting an underlying multi-factor structure (Importance, Attitude, and Programmatic Change). However, the specific results of any exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis performed by the authors (Howard, McKeachie, and Markus) are not included in this summary. A thorough factor analysis would be necessary to confirm the dimensionality of the scale and ensure that the items reliably group into the intended sub-constructs, particularly given the blend of value statements and attitudinal items.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report student survey instrument (Attitude and Value Assessment)

Format: Multi-part questionnaire utilizing different Likert scale formats.

Language Available: English (Original development language)

Population Group: Educational and Mentoring Populations

Age Group: Typically college students (adaptable for high school and older youth)

Population Details: Designed for administration to students enrolled in college courses, often used in conjunction with curriculum focused on social issues or community service.

Test Methodology: Primarily used in a pre-post test design to measure the impact of an educational intervention or course on social values. Part I uses a 4-point scale (Importance); Part II uses a 5-point scale (Agreement); Part III uses a 4-point scale (Degree of Increase/Strengthening).

Keywords

Student assessment, educational psychology, values clarification, civic education, program evaluation, higher education, altruistic intentions, mentoring programs, social beliefs, Howard and McKeachie.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected] (Jeffrey Howard)

Correspondence Address: Jeffrey Howard and Gregory Markus, Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1248

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1992 (Developed by Jeffrey Howard and Wilbert McKeachie).

Permissions and Fees: Permission for use is required directly from Jeffrey Howard. Contact can be made via email at [email protected].

The original PDF of the instrument is available through the Compendium of Research and Assessment Tools (CART). The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://cart.rmcdenver.com/instruments/social_responsibility.pdf

Reference’s

Howard, J., & McKeachie, W. (1992). Social Responsibility Inventory. Unpublished scale, University of Michigan.

Howard, J., & Markus, G. (n.d.). Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan.

Items of the Social Responsibility Inventory

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Social Responsibility Inventory

Developed by Jeffrey Howard and Wilbert McKeachie‚ 1992

Social Responsibility Inventory

Student Survey

College ______________

Semester _____________

 Please complete the following survey. Your answers will be treated confidentially. Answering the questionnaire is voluntary‚ and it is your right not to answer any or all of the questions. However‚ your cooperation will be helpful both for this course and for other courses in which it is given.

 Please return this form to the envelope that the instructor has been given. Thank you.

 Demographic Information

 A. Student I.D. #___________________________________________

 B. Course _____________ C. Section ____________

 D. Sex: 1. male 2. female

 E. Race (optional):

1. African-American
2. Asian-American
3. Caucasian
4. Hispanic
5. Native American Indian
6. Other (specify)_______________

F. Class Standing: 1. Freshman‚ 2. Sophomore‚ 3. Junior‚ 4. Senior‚ 5. Graduate

 Part 1: using the scale below please indicate the importance to you personally of the following:

 1 not important‚ 2 somewhat important‚ 3 very important‚ 4 essential

• _____ G. working toward equal opportunity for all U.S. citizens
• _____ H. developing a meaningful philosophy of life
• _____ I. becoming involved in a program to improve my community
• _____ J. being very well off financially
• _____ K. volunteering my time helping people in need
• _____ L. giving 3% or more of my income to help those in need
• _____ M. finding a career that provides the opportunity to be helpful to others or useful to society

 Part II: Using the scale below please indicate your response to the following items:

 1 strongly disagree‚ 2 disagree‚ 3 undecided‚ 4 agree‚ 5 strongly agree

• _____ N. adults should give some time for the good of their community or country
• _____ O. ha‎ving an impact on the world is within the reach of most individuals
• _____ P. most misfortunes that occur to people are frequently the result of circumstances beyond their control (over)
• _____ Q. if I could change one thing about society it would be to achieve greater social justice
• _____ R. I can learn from prison inmates
• _____ S. I make quick judgments about homeless people
• _____ T. individuals should be ready to inhibit their own pleasures if these inconvenience others
• _____ U. people‚ regardless of whether they have been successful or not‚ ought to help those in need
• _____ V. people ought to help those in need as “payback” for their own opportunities‚ fortunes‚ and successes
• _____ W. if I had been born in poverty‚ chances are that I would not be attending this college
• _____ X. I feel that I can make a difference in the world

(Part III is only on the post-test)

 Part III: Using the scale below please indicate the degree to which participation in this course has increased or strengthened your:

 1 not at all‚ 2 somewhat‚ 3 quite a bit‚ 4 a great deal

• _____ Y. intention to serve others in need
• _____ Z. intention to give to ch‎arity to help those in need
• _____ AA. sense of purpose or direction in life
• _____ BB. orientation toward others and away from yourself
• _____ CC. intention to work on behalf of social justice
• _____ DD. belief that helping those in need is one’s social responsibility
• _____ EE. belief that one can make a difference in the world
• _____ FF. understanding of the role of external forces as shapers of the individual
• _____ GG. tolerance and appreciation for others