Search results

Purpose: Previous research identified a measurement gap in the individual assessment of social misconduct in the workplace related to gender. This gap implies that women respond to comparable self-reported acts of bullying or sexual discrimination slightly more often than men with the self-labeling as “bullied” or “sexually discriminated and/or harassed.” This study tests this hypothesis for women and men in the scientific workplace and explores patterns of gender-related differences in self-reporting behavior.

Basic design: The hypotheses on the connection between gender and the threshold for self-labeling as having been bullied or sexually discriminated against were tested based on a sample from a large German research organization. The sample includes 5,831 responses on bullying and 6,987 on sexual discrimination (coverage of 24.5 resp. 29.4 percentage of all employees). Due to a large number of cases and the associated high statistical power, this sample for the first time allows a detailed analysis of the “gender-related measurement gap.” The research questions formulated in this study were addressed using two hierarchical regression models to predict the mean values of persons who self-labeled as having been bullied or sexually discriminated against. The status of the respondents as scientific or non-scientific employees was included as a control variable.

Results: According to a self-labeling approach, women reported both bullying and sexual discrimination more frequently. This difference between women and men disappeared for sexual discrimination when, in addition to the gender of a person, self-reported behavioral items were considered in the prediction of self-labeling. For bullying, the difference between the two genders remained even in this extended prediction. No statistically significant relationship was found between the frequency of self-reported items and the effect size of their interaction with gender for either bullying or sexual discrimination. When comparing bullying and sexual discrimination, it should be emphasized that, on average, women report experiencing a larger number of different behavioral items than men.

Interpretation and relevance: The results of the study support the current state of research. However, they also show how volatile the measurement instruments for bullying and sexual discrimination are. For example, the gender-related measurement gap is considerably influenced by single items in the Negative Acts Questionnaire and Sexual Experience Questionnaire. The results suggest that women are generally more likely than men to report having experienced bullying and sexual discrimination. While an unexplained “gender gap” in the understanding of bullying was found for bullying, this was not the case for sexual discrimination.

The purpose of this paper is to measure the degree of item difficulty in translation multiple-choice items in terms of 1-parameter logistic (1-PL) model of the item response theory (IRT). Also, the paper proposes a hypothesis in which a participant who answers a translation test possesses some amount of translation competence which affects the end-result.

In total, 150 translation students from the Bachelor of Arts in Translation Studies from the three Iranian universities participated in this research paper. The translation participants were requested to answer the questions. The items were formulated in such a way that the question was stated in English and the four choices were written in Farsi. To interpret the obtained results, this research paper employed 1-PL and 2-parameter logistic (2-PL) models using Stata (2016). In addition, to demonstrate results in terms of 1-PL, item characteristic curves (a graphical representation showing the degree of difficulty of each item) was used.

Using Stata platform, the findings of this research paper showed that through the application of IRT, evaluators were able to calculate the difficulty degree of each items (1-PL) and correspondingly the translation competence (2-PL) of each participant.

One of the limitations is the proportionately small number of translation participants at the Bachelor of Arts.

Although a few number of studies concentered on the role of translation competence, there did not exist any research focusing on translation competence empirically in higher education.

Drawing on social identity theory and the concept of perceived organizational support, the authors conducted an online, exploratory survey of 150 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) workers in 28 countries to examine whether being LGBT provides a unique perspective in the workplace, if they perceive their employer appreciates this perspective, and what effects this has on perceived discrimination and perceived career advancement. Collectively these questions have implications for work engagement and career prospects of LGBT workers. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Multiple regression and qualitative analyses were used to analyze Likert scale questions along with open-ended options.

The majority of respondents agree that being LGBT offers a unique perspective compared to heterosexual workers. The more respondents agree that they have a different perspective, the more they feel discriminated against. After controlling for demographic variables as well as education, tenure, job level, and disclosure, hierarchical linear regression analyses showed offering a unique perspective increases perceived career advantages. Results also showed increased perceived career advantages if the employer appreciates this perspective. Results of a second regression analysis also showed that a unique perspective is associated with more perceived discrimination, unless their employer appreciates this perspective.

Although single-item measures and a small international sample limit generalizability, rich qualitative responses provide insights into LGBT attitudes across multiple countries.

This study can be applied to future understandings of the diverse nature of LGBT perceptions and attitudes in the workplace.

This is one of the first studies to examine LGBT perceptions that they possess a unique perspective that should be valued by employers.

This exploratory study is one of the first to recognize unique LGBT perspectives and examine the relationship between their perspectives and perceived discrimination and career advantages.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate diversity management in an under-researched country by merging theoretical insights developed in the Western literature with cultural aspects of a traditionally homogeneous country, South Korea.

This study integrates theory and research on why diversity can have either a positive (i.e. the information/decision-making paradigm) or a negative (i.e. the social categorization paradigm) effect on performance with different diversity perspectives (i.e. integration-and-learning, access-and-legitimacy, and discrimination-and-fairness). This study develops a model of when and how gender diversity affects organization performance and test the model with a sample of 177 South Korean organizations.

This study finds that gender diversity is negatively related to organization performance in South Korea. This study also finds that the effect of gender diversity is contingent on organizational diversity perspectives. Organizations with high gender diversity perform better to the extent that they have a discrimination-fairness perspective, but not a business-oriented perspective. On the other hand, a discrimination-fairness perspective is unrelated to performance for organizations that are low in gender diversity.

Although gender diversity in the South Korean workplace continues to increase, the relationship between gender diversity and organization performance has rarely been studied in the aspect of Korea’s traditionally homogeneous culture. This study highlights the importance of cultural-contingencies in understanding the consequences of diversity.

This study aims at developing an instrument to measure the latent trait propensity to drop out in face-to-face higher education.

Based on Tinto's student integration theory, a 27-item scale was created to measure student propensity to drop out of undergraduate programs. Item response theory was used to evaluate the psychometric analysis of the items. Furthermore, different methodologies were used to evaluate and provide evidence for content validity, response process validity, internal structure validity and criterion-related validity.

With the support of specialists in the construct, the interpretation of the scores for the use of the scale was defined in four levels of propensity: high, moderate, low and very low.

The latent trait propensity to drop out in face-to-face higher education allows the inclusion of new items and aspects in the instrument. Thus, it can be adapted to distance education.

The students' propensity to drop out score can be useful for researchers and administration units in colleges and universities in the planning of permanent institutional actions and programs to take preventive measures.

Minimize dropout in order to raise the educational level of the population and make better use of the resources invested in education.

This study points out when, why and how propensity to drop out can be measured and how scores can be interpreted in the context of the problem.

The present chapter addresses a topic that is of growing interest – namely, the exploration of alternative item response theory (IRT) models for noncognitive assessment. Previous research in the assessment of trait emotional intelligence (or “trait emotional self-efficacy”) has been limited to traditional psychometric techniques (e.g., classical test theory) under the notion of a dominance response processes describing the relationship between individuals' latent characteristics and individuals' response selection. The present study, presents the first unfolding IRT modeling effort in the general field of emotional intelligence (EI). We applied the Generalized Graded Unfolding Model (GGUM) in order to evaluate the response process and the item properties on the short form of the trait emotional intelligence questionnaire (TEIQue-SF). A sample of 866 participants completed the English version of the TEIQue-SF. Results suggests that the GGUM has an adequate fit to the data. Furthermore, inspection of the test information and standard error functions revealed that the TEIQue-SF is accurate for low and middle scores on the construct; however several items had low discrimination parameters. Implications for the benefits of unfolding models in the assessment of trait EI are discussed.

The lack of a reliable and valid measurement tool for coding achievement emerges as a major problem in Turkey. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop a Scratch-based coding achievement test.

Initially, an item pool with 31 items was created. The item pool was classified within the framework of Bayman and Mayer’s (1988) types of coding knowledge to support content validity of the test. Then the item pool was applied to 186 volunteer undergraduates at Hacettepe University during the spring semester of the 2017-2018 academic year. Subsequently, the item analysis was conducted for construct validity of the test.

In all, 13 items were discarded from the test, leaving a total of 18 items. Out of the 18-item version of the coding achievement test, 4, 5 and 9 items measured syntactic, conceptual and strategic knowledge, respectively, among the types of coding knowledge. Furthermore, average item discrimination index (0.531), average item difficulty index (0.541) and Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient (0.801) of the test were calculated.

Scratch users, especially those who are taking introductory courses at Turkish universities, could benefit from a reliable and valid coding achievement test developed in this study.

This paper has theoretical and practical value, as it provides detailed developmental stages of a reliable and valid Scratch-based coding achievement test.

Accessibility to a precise tool for healthcare management and self-precaution among diabetic patients is an absolute necessity. This paper aims to develop and validate diabetes-related awareness instrument (DRAI) – an instrument that measures diabetics awareness about risk factors and prevention strategies.

The reliability and validity of the DRAI were tested with a sample of 112 diabetics. The construct validity of the DRAI was measured using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Item discrimination, reliability, usefulness and validity of the items were determined by performing Cronbach's alpha, item difficulty and discrimination index analysis.

The study finds DRAI – a reliable and valid instrument to assess diabetics awareness towards diabetes mellitus, its associated risk factors and prevention strategies. The value of Cronbach's alpha for all three constructs was above the threshold level of 0.70. Under exploratory factor analysis, “Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin” test value of 0.805 exhibits a meritorious sample adequacy and “Bartlet's test of Sphericity” was statistically significant with p = 0.032. Therefore, results of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed that all fitness indices of the model to be excellent fit.

The present instrument can help to determine whether the individual is susceptible to diabetes, timely prevention and reduction in the incidence of diabetes mellitus.

DRAI is the first of its kind tool to assess the awareness and knowledge about diabetes-related risk factors and prevention strategies in such a demographically diverse population of India.

Engagement is a construct that varies according to the subject, object and context; this has been used to justify the coexistence of a variety of construct definitions and scales. Instead of proposing a new scale, this paper aims to create a procedure for comparing scales and to use it to evaluate brand engagement measures in social media.

This study first defines a procedure for the selection, standardization and comparison of scales; this procedure considers both the classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT). The authors apply the procedure in a survey of 233 respondents to compare three scales for measuring consumer engagement with brands in social media.

The establishment of a procedure for scale comparison is useful in assisting researchers to choose specific measures. Results showed that the three scales have similar characteristics, but Vivek et al.’s (2014) scale is recommended when better discrimination between construct dimensions is required, Hollebeek et al.’s (2014) scale could be used as a one-dimensional scale and Dessart et al.’s (2016) reduced scale has better ability to capture information for the affective and cognitive dimensions. None of the scales were very efficient in discriminating weakly and strongly engaged individuals.

This study makes a substantive contribution by proposing a procedure for scale comparison that considers CTT and IRT and shows the advantages, limitations and recommendations for using three different scales of consumer engagement.

Knowledge about cognitive operations and processes (COPs) required for success (1=correct, 0=incorrect) on test items or learning tasks is very important for in-depth understanding of the nature of student performance and the development of valid instruments for its measurement. A key problem in obtaining such knowledge is the validation of hypothesized COPs and their role in the measurement properties of test items. To provide validation feedback for both normally achieving students and students with learning disabilities, it is important to obtain information on the validity of the COPs for students at different ability levels and individual test items (or tasks). To address this issue, the present chapter introduces a method of estimating the probability for correct performance on individual COPs at fixed ability levels thus providing validity information across ability levels and individual test items. When item response theory (IRT) estimates of the item parameters are known (e.g., in a test bank of IRT calibrated items or published research), the proposed validation method does not require information about raw (or ability) scores of examinees. This method is illustrated for algebra test items and reading comprehension test items calibrated in IRT.