Defining Psychological Empowerment Construct: Analysis of Three Empowerment Scales

Abstract

This study aimed to contribute to the validation of psychological empowerment, which is a combination of sense of control (intrapersonal component), critical awareness of the sociopolitical environment (interactional component), and community involvement (behavioral component). Three scales of empowerment used to evaluate the 3 components were translated into Portuguese, adapted for the Portuguese population, and applied in person, by phone and by e‐mail. Participants were enrolled in or had completed a program of recognition of prior learning. We tested reflective and formative measurement models and the results suggested that a reflective model fits the data better than a formative one. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed psychological empowerment as a hierarchical third‐order factor. Second‐order factors correspond to the intrapersonal, interactional, and behavioral empowerment components, reflected in first‐order factors: leadership competence, policy control, source of power, nature of power, instruments of power, and participation behaviors.

Validating the formative nature of psychological empowerment construct: Testing cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and relational empowerment components

“…Given its breadth of application of Zimmerman's model of PE, particularly in the field of community psychology, it is the central model used in the theoretical reflection and the empirical research presented in this article. This study intended to explore current issues in the empowerment theory and measurement based on the concerns raised by Christens (), Peterson (), and Miguel and colleagues (). Peterson () pointed to the need to clarify the nature of PE coming from acknowledging existing evidence of potential misspecification of PE as a reflective construct.…”

“…Their results revealed weak or modest correlations between measures of PE dimensions (coefficients of .19, .24, and .47). Miguel and colleagues () studied the psychometric properties of PE (three components structure) in a sample of 277 adults in Portugal. They found that measures of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral empowerment components were uncorrelated or very weak correlated (coefficients ranging from .00 to .03).…”

“…In their study, using a sample of 277 adults, after validating a scale to assess PE they test both reflective and formative models of PE. Their results suggest that a reflective measurement of PE fits the data better than a formative one (Miguel, Ornelas, & Maroco, ). Acknowledging limitations of their study and pointing directions for further research, Miguel and colleagues () recommended that new research should test the measure in other populations and through a larger sample.…”

“…Their results suggest that a reflective measurement of PE fits the data better than a formative one (Miguel, Ornelas, & Maroco, ). Acknowledging limitations of their study and pointing directions for further research, Miguel and colleagues () recommended that new research should test the measure in other populations and through a larger sample. Moreover, they agreed with Christens () on the relevance of including a fourth component–relational empowerment–in the measurement model of PE.…”

“…In the light of these concerns, Miguel, Ornelas, and Marôco () published a paper in the Journal of Community Psychology in 2015 in which they presented PE as a third‐order hierarchical construct comprising three components (i.e., cognitive, emotional, and behavioral; Zimmerman, ). In their study, using a sample of 277 adults, after validating a scale to assess PE they test both reflective and formative models of PE.…”