Browsing by Subject "scale development"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Developing a Construct-Valid Measure of Workplace Aggression(2019-09) Shewach, OrenConceptualizations of workplace aggression predominantly converge to suggest that intent to harm others is a necessary feature of aggression (Hershcovis et al., 2007; Jex & Bayne, 2017; Neuman & Baron, 2005). However, inspection of workplace aggression scales suggests that many items do not contain face-validity with respect to inclusion of intent to harm. In a series of four studies, this dissertation examines the effect of inclusion of intent to harm on workplace aggression’s psychometric properties, with the ultimate goal to develop a construct-valid measure of aggression. In addition to the focus on intent to harm, this research evaluates the feature of response perspective (i.e., experienced versus enacted aggression) within aggression’s measurement, as well as aggression’s nomological network and factor structure. First, a general sample of working adults is surveyed to judge the degree to which existing workplace aggression scales contain the feature of intent to harm. It is found that existing workplace aggression scales primarily do not contain sufficient levels of intent to harm, indicating a disconnect between conceptual definition and operational measurement of aggression. Second, results from another working sample suggest that inclusion of intent to harm in aggression scales has substantial implications for aggression’s occurrence rate as well as its factor structure. Specifically, prior research that does not assess intent to harm overestimates the frequency of aggression. Third, it is found that workplace aggression’s external correlations are also overestimated when failing to include intent to harm in measures of aggression. It was also found that aggression without intent is highly correlated with a related construct, counterproductive work behavior (CWB), whereas aggression measured with intent is empirically distinguished from CWB. Using data from the second and third studies, a construct-valid workplace aggression scale is devised, coined the Intentional Workplace Aggression Scale (IWAS). The IWAS displayed stronger relationships with affective constructs such as trait anger and emotional stability than the situational variables of job satisfaction and organizational justice perceptions. Additionally, workplace aggression consistently displayed three lower-order facets: verbal aggression, physical aggression, and social undermining. The fourth study represented a cross-validation effort for IWAS findings and was undertaken in a sample of Korean firefighters. Though to a smaller magnitude than in the previous study, findings surrounding the influence of intent to harm on aggression’s occurrence rate and nomological network were replicated. This study also showed moderate support for the factor structure of the IWAS. Finally, findings across multiple studies indicate that among the same individuals, workplace aggression from the victim perspective and the aggressor perspective are moderately to strongly related.Item The IEP Data Collection Intentions Scale (IDCIS): Scale Development and Validation for Intended Score Interpretation and Use in Early Childhood(2019-08) Rudolph, BrennaThere is evidence to suggest a research-to-practice gap exists in regard to Early Childhood Special Education (ECSE) teachers’ collection of data highlighting students’ progress toward meeting their Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals and objectives (i.e., IEP data collection). Due to the negligible amount of research in this area in addition to the limitations present in the literature, however, it is unclear what factors are responsible for causing and maintaining this gap. Given that teachers are ultimately responsible for deciding whether and how to engage in IEP data collection, a focus on better understanding teachers’ intentions to collect IEP data is a logical first step. With an emphasis on enhancing the measurement techniques employed in previous studies, this application of a cross-sectional survey design aimed to validate the intended interpretations and uses of scores resulting from administration of a newly developed scale—the IEP Data Collection Intentions Scale (IDCIS). Following survey completion by 368 ECSE teachers across the state of Minnesota, confirmatory factor analysis, item analysis, and item response modeling were performed to support scale development. Results indicated that following minor adjustments, the IDCIS can be used to produce precise measures of teachers’ attitudes, subjective norms, self-efficacy, controllability, and intentions related to the collection of IEP data. Furthermore, the scores produced by IDCIS administration can be used to make valid and reliable inferences about teachers’ levels of each construct in order to inform the creation and modification of future implementation supports, thus decreasing the gap between what is known and what is practiced in today’s classrooms related to data collection.Item You Are What You Think: The Development and Initial Examination of a New Measure of Weight Mindset(2019-08) Auster-Gussman, LisaThere is growing body of research that suggests that individuals’ beliefs about body weight, herein called mindsets, are associated with a variety of health-relevant outcomes including eating and exercise behavior (for a review, see Burnette, Hoyt, & Orvidas, 2017). Although research is mounting, the literature lacks clarity as to which beliefs about weight are most important for predicting these health-relevant outcomes or even how to consistently define weight mindsets. The primary aim of this dissertation was to examine the value of a new perspective on weight beliefs. Study 1 led to the development of the Weight and Resources Mindset Questionnaire (WARM), a new, empirically validated, 12-item, four-factor measure of weight mindset that determines the extent to which individuals 1) are content or not content with their weight, 2) believe weight is changeable, 3) are content or not content with their access to weight management resources, and 4) believe they can increase their access to weight management resources. Studies 2 and 3 were part I and II of an explanatory sequential design. Study 2, a quantitative study, demonstrated that latent profile analysis of the WARM resulted in eight weight mindset classifications, and that an examination of differences in weight-related attitudes and behaviors (e.g. fruit and vegetable consumption, weight bias internalization) across these eight mindsets revealed patterns of findings not possible with already existing measures of weight mindset. For Study 3, qualitative interviews provided insights into the histories and general weight-related experiences and beliefs of individuals across weight mindsets. These findings were then integrated with the Study 2 findings to generate descriptions and labels for each of the eight weight mindsets. Together, these studies provide a new foundation for the systematic study of weight mindsets.