Testing! testing! one, two, three – Testing the theory in structural equation models!

Hayduk, Leslie A.; Cummings, Greta G.; Boadu, Kwame; Pazderka, Hannah; Boulianne, Shelley

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.001

Cited by 282 publications

(215 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

206

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Pesquisadores têm salientado a importân-cia de inserir estes tipos de covariâncias apenas quando há explicação teórica ou outras justificativas plausíveis (Hayduk, Cummings, Boadu, Pazderka-Robinson, & Boulianne, 2007). No presente estudo, por um lado, os pares de itens 1-2 e 3-4 são propostos para avaliar a mesma dimensão teórica e possuem conteúdos semelhantes, por outro, o mesmo não acontece para os pares de itens 5-6 e 7-8, que deveriam avaliar as dimensões vigor, absorção, dedicação e absorção, respectivamente.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Evidências adicionais de validade da UWES-9 em amostras brasileiras

Ferreira¹,

Valentini²,

Damásio³

et al. 2016

Estudos De Psicologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estudos de Psicologia, 21(4), outubro a dezembro de 2016, 435-445 Resumo O engajamento no trabalho consiste em um estado motivacional positivo manifesto em sentimentos de vigor, absorção e dedicação ao trabalho. Para avaliá-lo, foi desenvolvida a Escala de Engajamento no Trabalho de Utrecht. O presente trabalho reuniu evidências de validade da versão reduzida da escala (UWES-9) por meio de análises de estrutura interna, de invariância por gênero e setor de trabalho (público ou privado), e de relações com variáveis externas. A amostra foi composta por 2.897 trabalhadores de ambos os sexos (57,3% do sexo feminino), com média de idade de 32,8. Os modelos indicaram que a estrutura unidimensional obteve melhor ajuste e que os parâmetros dos itens não foram significativamente enviesados pelo sexo, setor e tempo de trabalho. A escala apresentou correlações positivas fortes com sentimentos positivos associados ao trabalho. As propriedades psicométricas do instrumento recomendam seu uso futuro em investigações destinadas a avaliar o engajamento no trabalho em amostras brasileiras.Palavras-chave: comportamento organizacional; psicologia positiva; validade estatística. AbstractAdditional validity evidences of UWES-9 in Brazilian samples. Work engagement is a positive motivational state which is expressed in vigor, absorption and dedication feelings toward work. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale was developed to measure this phenomenon. The present work collected validity evidence for the reduced scale (UWES-9) concerning its internal structure, gender and work sector (public and private) invariance and relationships with external variables. The sample consisted of 2,897 employees from both genders (57.3% were female), mean age equal to 32.8. The models indicated a unidimensional structure fit to the data, and the items parameters were not significantly biased due to gender, work sector, and job tenure. The scale showed positive strong correlations with positive feelings toward work. The psychometric properties of the scale recommend its future adoption in researchers about work engagement in Brazilian samples.

show abstract

Section: Discussionunclassified

Evidências adicionais de validade da UWES-9 em amostras brasileiras

Ferreira¹,

Valentini²,

Damásio³

et al. 2016

Estudos De Psicologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on recommendations from previous psychometric studies, the measurement model was specified with indicators for each WHOQOL-BREF domain and it was assumed that each domain would load onto a second-order factor, namely QoL (Skevington et al 2004;WHOQOL-Group 1998a,b). Criteria for GFI and CFI were set at 0.90, the RMSEA at \.05 (Ullman 2001) and model v 2 p-values \.05 were also considered indicative of ill fit (Hayduk et al 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The evidence yielded in examining the construct validity of the BREF was also not consistent with its hypothesized measurement structure, this being most marked for the Norwegian sample. We only report suggested modifications given our lack of theoretical justification for revising the model (Hayduk 1996;Hayduk et al 2006) based on the Norwegian findings.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The suitability of the WHOQOL–BREF for Canadian and Norwegian older adults

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of the WHOQOL-BREF, a generic quality of life scale, among older people in Canada and Norway. Very similar data from the Canadian and Norwegian Field Trial data (Canada n = 192; Norway, n = 469) were analyzed and compared. Higher negatively skewed mean scores were found for all WHOQOL-BREF domains in Canada. For both study samples, missing values were highest for the sex item from the social domain. Ceiling effects were found (Canada n = 21; Norway n = 11) primarily among items in the physical and environmental domains. In both study samples, a multitrait multimethod procedure indicated items correlated most strongly with their parent domains; however, equally appreciable correlations were observed between physical, psychological, and environmental items (r = 0.33-0.64; p \ 0.01). The social domain had the lowest internal consistency (a = 0.67 Canada, a = 0.55 Norway). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) yielded marginal goodness-of-fit between the hypothesized WHOQOL-BREF measurement model and the sample data as well as differing patterns of domain misspecification. Patterns of correlations (p \ 0.01) of WHOQOL-BREF domains with WHOQOL-OLD facets, a global QOL item, the SF-12, and the geriatric depression scale provided evidence of convergent and divergent validity. Domain scores also significantly discriminated between health and unhealthy populations and presence of morbidity. Empirical support was found, in part, for the construct validity of the WHOQOL-BREF in older adults. Despite some different patterns found in the CFA, possibly due to cultural or sampling differences, it appears that the instrument is reliable, valid, and facilitates cross-cultural comparisons.

show abstract

“…Though for a good fit, Chi-square value should be non-significant for 0.05 threshold [19], it does sometimes provide significant value and erroneously indicate a poor fit, as the test is sensitive to sample size [20]. Owing to this reason, degree of freedom Df and probability p values should be reported, along with CMIN/DF which for a good fit has a value less than 3 [21], [22]. RMR and RMSEA goodness of fit indicators for a model must have values less than 0.08 and GFI.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%