Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Method Factor (method + factor)
Selected AbstractsThe Penn State Worry Questionnaire: psychometric properties of the Korean versionDEPRESSION AND ANXIETY, Issue 10 2008Young-Jin Lim M.A. Abstract The factor structure and concurrent validity of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) were examined in two college student samples in Korea. We demonstrated method effects due to the inclusion of negatively keyed items. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the single-factor model with method factor. This indicates that the Korean version of the PSWQ (K-PSWQ) can be contaminated by method effects and response patterns are different between positively worded and reverse-scored items. Thus, the relevance of negatively worded items in the K-PSWQ is questioned. Depression and Anxiety, 2008. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] A validation study of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability InventoryINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT, Issue 2 2010Nhung T. Nguyen Despite the claims made about the effectiveness of cross-cultural training programs, few studies have examined the reliability and validity of the instruments used in these training programs. In this study, the authors examined the factor structure of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) via a confirmatory factor analytic approach. A series of confirmatory factor analytic models was tested and applied at the item level to both the CCAI and Goldberg's Big Five Inventory. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model in which a method factor was estimated fits the data significantly better than a model without such a method effect. Further, the method factor suppressed substantive relationships such that the two CCAI factors of Emotional Resilience and Personal Autonomy became significant correlates with self-reported number of international job assignments after accounting for method variance. Implications for research and practice are discussed. [source] Acculturation Attitudes: A Comparison of Measurement Methods,JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 7 2007Judit Arends-Tóth Three measurement methods (1, 2, or 4 statements) to assess acculturation attitudes were compared in 2 studies involving Turkish immigrants in The Netherlands. Each measurement method revealed support for differentiation between acculturation in the public and the private domains. The Turkish culture was more valued than the Dutch culture in the private domain, while both cultures were about equally favored in the public domain. A direct comparison of the 3 measurement methods found evidence for a general method factor on which all 3 measurement methods loaded, and an acculturation attitude factor with positive loadings for 2 indicators (private and public domains). The 2-statement measurement method addressing public and private life domains was found to provide a short, though comprehensive instrument. [source] Three method factors explaining the low correlations between assessment center dimension ratings and scores on personality inventories,EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY, Issue 2 2004Nanja J. Kolk In general, correlations between assessment centre (AC) ratings and personality inventories are low. In this paper, we examine three method factors that may be responsible for these low correlations: differences in (i) rating source (other versus self), (ii) rating domain (general versus specific), and (iii) rating format (multi- versus single item). This study tests whether these three factors diminish correlations between AC exercise ratings and external indicators of similar dimensions. Ratings of personality and performance were combined in an analytical framework following a 2,×,2,×,2 (source, domain, format) completely crossed, within subjects design. Results showed partial support for the influence of each of the three method factors. Implications for future research are discussed. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] EXPLORING RELATIONS BETWEEN TYPICAL AND MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE RATINGS AND THE FIVE FACTOR MODEL OF PERSONALITYPERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 4 2001ROBERT E. PLOYHART The study tests the distinction between typical and maximum criteria with ratings of transformational leadership performance, and examines whether the criterion-related validities of the five factor model differ for the two types of criteria. Using an East Asian military sample (n= 1,259) where multiple ratings of typical and maximum performance were obtained from different sources, we used structural equation modeling to test the typical/maximum performance distinction. Results found that typical and maximum performance are different latent constructs and that this distinction is present even after considering rating method factors (i.e., rater source, time). The importance of this distinction is shown by the fact that validities for the personality constructs were not equally predictive of both criteria: Openness was most predictive of maximum performance, Neuroticism was most predictive of typical performance, and Extroversion was predictive of both. By distinguishing typical from maximum performance constructs, relationships between personality and transformational leadership were found to be stronger than previous research suggested. [source] | ||||||||||