Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Psychology
Commentaries On “Scale Use And Abuse: Toward Best Practices In The Deployment Of Scales”, Constantine S. Katsikeas, Shilpa Madan, C. Miguel Brendl, Bobby J. Calder, Donald R. Lehmann, Hans Baumgartner, Bert Weijters, Mo Wang, Chengquan Huang, Joel Huber
Commentaries On “Scale Use And Abuse: Toward Best Practices In The Deployment Of Scales”, Constantine S. Katsikeas, Shilpa Madan, C. Miguel Brendl, Bobby J. Calder, Donald R. Lehmann, Hans Baumgartner, Bert Weijters, Mo Wang, Chengquan Huang, Joel Huber
Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business
Five comments below provide strong and interesting perspectives on multi-item scale use. They define contexts and research areas where developed scales are valuable and where they are vulnerable. Katsikeas and Madan begin by taking a global perspective on scale use, demonstrating how the use and transferability of scales become even more problematic as researchers move across languages and cultures. They provide guidance for scale use that is particularly relevant to international marketing and marketing strategy research. Brendl and Calder acknowledge the use of well-formed scales as measured variables in psychological experiments, both as independent and dependent variables, but critique the …
Assessing Meaningful Within-Person Variability In Likert-Scale Rated Personality Descriptions: An Irt Tree Approach, Jonas W. B. Lang, Filip Lievens, Filip De Fruyt, Ingo Zettler, Jennifer L. Tackett
Assessing Meaningful Within-Person Variability In Likert-Scale Rated Personality Descriptions: An Irt Tree Approach, Jonas W. B. Lang, Filip Lievens, Filip De Fruyt, Ingo Zettler, Jennifer L. Tackett
Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business
Personality researchers and clinical psychologists have long been interested in withinperson variability in a given personality trait. Two critical methodological challenges that stymie current research on within-person variability are separating meaningful within-person variability from 1) true differences in trait level and 2) careless responding (or person unreliability). To partly avoid these issues, personality researchers commonly only study within-person variability in personality states over time using the standard deviation (SD) across repeated measurements of the same items (typically across days)—a relatively resource-intensive approach. In this article, we detail an approach that allows researchers to measure another type of within-person variability. The …
Revised Estimates Of Dimension And Exercise Variance Components In Assessment Center Postexercise Dimension Ratings, Charles E. Lance, Tracy A. Lambert, Amanda G. Gewin, Filip Lievens, James M. Conway
Revised Estimates Of Dimension And Exercise Variance Components In Assessment Center Postexercise Dimension Ratings, Charles E. Lance, Tracy A. Lambert, Amanda G. Gewin, Filip Lievens, James M. Conway
Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business
The authors reanalyzed assessment center (AC) multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrices containing correlations among postexercise dimension ratings (PEDRs) reported by F. Lievens and J. M. Conway (2001). Unlike F. Lievens and J. M. Conway, who used a correlated dimension-correlated uniqueness model, we used a different set of confirmatory-factor-analysis-based models (1-dimension-correlated Exercise and 1-dimension-correlated uniqueness models) to estimate dimension and exercise variance components in AC PEDRs. Results of reanalyses suggest that, consistent with previous narrative reviews, exercise variance components dominate over dimension variance components after all. Implications for AC construct validity and possible redirections of research on the validity of ACs are discussed.