Search results

Although Colquitt’s Organizational Justice Scale (COJS) is one of the most widely used organizational justice scales (OJS) worldwide, a rigorous adaptation and validation in Italy is still missing. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to examine the construct validity and reliability of the Italian translation of the scale.

Factorial and concurrent validity were examined to assess construct validity. A confirmatory factorial analysis through structural equation modelling was conducted on five factorial models: one-factor, two-factor, three-factor, four-factor and second-order factor model. Concurrent validity implied the examination of the relationships between organizational justice and job satisfaction (convergent validity) and between organizational justice and workplace bullying (discriminant validity).

Evidence of the prevalence of the original Colquitt (2001) four-factor model was found, though also the second-order model obtained adequate goodness of fit. Findings supported both convergent and discriminant validity. Reliability analysis reported evidence of excellent internal consistency. Thus, the Italian version of the OJS can be used in Italy for research and practical purposes.

This is the first study properly addressing the factorial and concurrent validity of the OJS in Italy.

Individuals with an intellectual disability (ID) develop mental health difficulties at similar rates to individuals in the general population. Using Patient Reported Outcome Measures can help track deterioration and improve the outcomes of individuals seeking help for their difficulties. The Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation-Learning Disabilities (CORE-LD) is a multi-trait measure of psychological distress which has shown moderate test-rest reliability. However, the CORE-LD is yet to be validated for the population it was designed for. Therefore the purpose of this paper is to establish the concurrent validity of the CORE-LD in a population of individuals with a diagnosis of mild–moderate ID.

Participants with a diagnosis of mild–moderate ID, as well as other co-morbidities, were recruited from two UK inpatient hospitals and asked to complete the CORE-LD and its general population counterpart the Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure (CORE-OM).

Statistically significant differences were found regarding the CORE-LD across gender, with females scoring higher on the CORE-LD than males. There was no significant difference between security levels. The overall mean scores on each measure were moderately correlated. The data from this analysis suggest a significant positive correlation (r_s=0.68).

This initial study’s findings have demonstrated the CORE-LD may have concurrent validity, and further replication studies in larger and more diverse samples are needed.

Though brand love is recognized as being an important marketing topic both for theory and practice, a gap still exists with regard to its operationalization. To bridge this gap, this paper proposes a single-item measure (SIM) that uses a visual rating scale (i.e., a rating scale combining verbal with nonverbal contents).

Three studies covering over 700 respondents and examining three international brands over three product categories were conducted to test the new measure.

Findings provide consistent evidence for the reliability and validity of the proposed measure. They also demonstrate that brand love, as gauged by the new SIM, is good in predicting positive word of mouth, willingness to pay a higher price, and willingness to forgive brand mishaps.

The paper focuses on brand love mainly from a measurement perspective.

This paper provides a practical and parsimonious tool to measure brand love.

Extant SIMs of brand love are less than ordinal, content invalid, of unknown reliability, and of untested concurrent validity. This paper provides academics and practitioners alike with a SIM of brand love that is ordinal, content valid, and tested in terms of reliability and concurrent validity.

This study is to establish the validity and reliability of Malay version of Post-traumatic Check List-5 (MPCL-5) among the fire and rescue officers in the state of Selangor, Malaysia.

A cross-sectional study was conducted, which involved 100 firefighters from the state of Selangor, Malaysia. Construct validity, internal consistency, and concurrent validity were performed and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20. Concurrent validity was tested with validated Malay version of Trauma Screen Questionnaire (TSQ-M).

Overall internal consistency reliability was a 0.960 and individual construct Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.827 to 0.926. The model, which consists of four constructs with 20 items, demonstrated the presence of acceptable loading factors. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) are 0.81, 0.65, 0.31 and 0.95 respectively at an optimum cut-off score of 35.

The Post Traumatic Check List 5 (PCL-5) is the latest tool based on DSM-5 developed recently and still having limited studies on the psychometric properties of the tool in local population and the findings produced are comparable with the results from validation from previous studies. The study limitations are population samples used are considering the minimum numbers of sample for each item for factor analysis and the concurrent validation was tested with the TSQ-M instead of the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5).

The study suggested that MPCL-5 is acceptable to be used to measure post-traumatic stress disorder in local populations.

There are limited known validation studies for PCL-5 in local populations and this is the first study done among fire and rescue officers in Malaysia. The results are comparable with findings from previous studies and therefore MPCL-5 are valid and reliable for PTSD screening.

To broaden the range of well-being outcomes that can be measured for patients with depressed mood and/or other mental health issues the aim is to determine the reliability and validity of a self-reported instrument that was designed by the Human Givens Institute to evaluate emotional distress (emotional needs audit – ENA).

The ENA was administered to 176 patients, aged between 18-65 years (mean age: 39.2 years). The acceptability of the ENA was examined as well as its internal consistency (Cronbach ' s alphas). ENA was administered at four time points and test-retest reliability was conducted between times 1 and 2. The data from three scales also administered to these patients (SWLS, CORE-OM and HADS) were used to aid the conduct of the ENA construct validity (concurrent and discriminant). Analysis of the ENA sensitivity/specificity was also performed.

All the ENA items (except one) were shown to have good acceptability. The internal consistency was also very strong (Cronbach ' s alpha: 0.84); the construct validity also revealed positive results for the ENA: concurrent validity (r=0.51-0.62; p < 0.001); discriminant validity (r=0.22-0.28; p < 0.01). Test-retest reliability was r=0.46 (p < 0.001). Finally, ENA demonstrated high sensitivity (80 per cent), and moderate specificity (35 per cent).

ENA was shown to be a valid and reliable instrument for measuring wellbeing, quality of life and emotional distress. It also allows insight into the causes of symptoms, dissatisfaction and distress. It is suggested that this tool has complementarity to standardised tools when used in clinical practice.

The purpose of this paper is to validate empirically a measurement scale of the effectiveness of R & D activities, starting from previous work in which the content was validated.

Following psychometric standards the authors have addressed the analysis phases of construct dimensionality, reliability and validity (convergent, discriminant and nomologic), and the scale criteria are shown to be valid in their three temporal manifestations (retrospective, concurrent and predictive). The empirical evidence was drawn from a sample of 85 companies belonging to the Spanish pharmaceutical sector.

Globally the authors provide evidence of reliability, validity of construct and validity of criterion in their diverse manifestations, for the scale designed and validated, on effectiveness in R & D. The authors divide the results into two groups: one for content of the scale and the other for relationships of the scale with other variables. With respect to the first, it is notable that, although in general the variables analyzed coincide with the previous broad and multidisciplinary theory on the success factors of R & D activities, what the authors provide is empirical evidence of the most important factors and variables for effectiveness in R & D; the authors emphasize that the results of the sample analyzed indicate that the most important factor is the close integration of the R & D activities with the corporate strategy, followed by the proper planning of these activities, and the achievement of financial results for the company. With respect to the relationship of the scale with other variables, the authors have found positive and significant relationships between the effectiveness in R & D and the following financial variables: net turnover and earnings after taxes. The authors have also found positive and significant relationships between different characteristics of the company and the achievement of success in R & D activities. Thus, being a company of larger size, the existence of an R & D department, the existence of specific incentive systems for the R & D personnel, the adoption of new management techniques in the R & D department, and the patents policy of the company are all factors that have a positive influence.

There are three main limitations of the study: the size of the sample; the decision to use a very particular highly innovatory sector, the pharmaceutical industry; and conducting the study in only one specific country, Spain. The results should be interpreted taking into account these limitations. Another limitation is the absence of previously validated scales. This meant that the authors were unable to do any comparative analyses.

The authors have contributed by summarizing and testing the existing theories on the factors of success in R & D. This should give R & D managers a more comprehensive and useful picture of the variables that have been considered more important, and should enable them to choose from among the range of variables proposed those that may be considered most relevant for inclusion in their own balanced scorecard. More generally, the results should help them in the management of their activity. For researchers the authors make available an already validated scale with which to work in various different samples and settings.

The originality of the work resides in two aspects. First, a very wide set of variables proposed in the literature is analyzed, with the object of establishing the relationships and the ranking of these variables, which would not be clear if the variables were analyzed in isolation. Second, there is originality in the methodology employed for measuring the result of activities with a high level of uncertainty and risk, specifically R & D activities in the highly innovative companies of the pharmaceutical industry. It is original because, to date, the scale has only been validated theoretically – there is no work in the literature validating it empirically.

The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of the masculine subordination stress (MSS) scale in a rural Bangladesh population.

The scale was validated using a sample of 342 Bangladeshi married men from five northwest villages of the country.

Exploratory factor analysis revealed a single-factorial structure of the scale: MSS. The MSS also showed adequate reliability and concurrent validity. It appears that the MSS is a reliable and valid instrument to measure MSS for rural Bangladeshi men.

The current study provides empirical support for the validity and reliability of the MSS in the rural Bangladesh context. Academicians and researchers who are seeking an instrument to assess masculine subordination-to-women stress may find it useful. Moreover, it may stimulate researchers to think about strategies for helping men to cope up with masculine stress from a positive viewpoint. It may also help practitioners to improve men's mental health at different settings.

This article describes the development of a measure of role conflict. Role conflict was conceptualized as consisting of four dimensions: intrasender, intersender, interrotle, and person‐role conflict respectively. Study 1 (N = 65), which was conducted to pilot test the 96 item questionnaire (reduced from 224 items after expert rating), resulted in the reduction of the questionnaire to 43 items with three interpretable dimensions. Study 2 (N = 100) was carried out to examine the construct validity of the scale and confirm the factor structure. There was convergence with the findings of Study 1. Cronbach alpha for each subscale was adequate, and evidence of concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validities was found. Study 3 (N = 242) attempted to provide some normative data for the measure, in addition to carrying out a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using LISREL. The findings of Study 2 were almost duplicated, and the CFA results lent greater support to a three‐factor structure of role conflict.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the procedures followed in developing and validating a context specific instrument to measure the performance of public schools in a Malaysian setting.

The paper adopted the mixed methodology, qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative approach was used at the initial stage of item generation for the instrument while the quantitative method was predominantly used to empirically establish the psychometric properties of the instrument.

The paper finds that the context‐specific instrument is psychometrically sound. The reliability index for all the dimensions are well above 0.75 and the various empirical analysis provide evidence of convergent, concurrent, and discriminant validity as well as dimensionality.

The paper provides detailed information on developing and validating a new context‐specific instrument. The method and procedure can be a good reference for researchers interested in developing instruments.

The soft system methodology intervention enhances holistic discussion in relation to the focal at the item generation phase. This allows a greater amount of creative debate resulting in a comprehensive list of indicators to be used the instrument.

This study aims to investigate outcomes of multisystemic therapy (MST) using the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) – part I.

This study, using a pre-post design, included a sample of 2,123 Norwegian youths (mean age = 14.7, SD = 1.34). The MST team supervisors assessed the YLS/CMI risk factors in addition to five behavioral treatment goals (Lives at home, Attends school/work, No violence/threats, Law-abiding and Drug-free) before and after treatment. In addition, data included responses from parent interviews six months post treatment.

Significant correlations were found between the total and dynamic YLS/CMI change scores and the additive index of behavioral treatment goals. In addition, the YLS/CMI change scores predicted the five treatment goals at the termination of treatment and at six-month follow-up.

The results indicate that the YLS/CMI is a valuable assessment tool for predicting the achievement of MST behavioral goals in adolescents with serious problem behavior.

This study provides an evaluation of the YLS/CMI in a Norwegian context and adds support for continued use of the YLS/CMI in MST.

This paper provides new insights about the YLS/CMI inventory as a tool for examining treatment change in MST. Results show that the YLS/CMI captures relevant risk factors in the youths’ environment.