nach oben

Journal of Business and Psychology

Erschienen in:

01.09.2011

To Aggregate or Not to Aggregate: Steps for Developing and Validating Higher-Order Multidimensional Constructs

verfasst von: Russell E. Johnson, Christopher C. Rosen, Chu-Hsiang Chang

Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology | Ausgabe 3/2011

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The use of higher-order multidimensional constructs (i.e., latent constructs comprised of standalone variables) in the organizational psychology and behavior literatures is becoming commonplace. Despite their advantages (e.g., greater parsimony and bandwidth), the development and validation of such constructs often unfolds in an indiscriminant fashion. It is not surprising, then, that much debate has arisen regarding the viability of many higher-order constructs. In this article, we outline ten recommendations for improving the construct- and criterion-related validity of higher-order constructs. Chief among these recommendations include the need for researchers to specify precise theoretical and empirical inclusion criteria, to rule out alternative explanations for the emergence of a higher-order factor and to assess incremental and relative importance. To illustrate how these recommendations play out, we apply them to core self-evaluation as an example. We believe that higher-order constructs may offer unique insight into work-relevant phenomena, provided they are established via rigorous means.

Nächster Artikel The Servant Leadership Survey: Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491–500.PubMedCrossRef

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.CrossRef

Bollen, K. A., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305–314.CrossRef

Bollen, K. A., & Ting, K. -F. (2000). A tetrad test for causal indicators. Psychological Methods, 5, 3–22.PubMedCrossRef

Chang, C. -H., Ferris, D. L., Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., & Tan, J. A. (in press). Core self-evaluations: A review and evaluation of the literature. Journal of Management (2012 Review Issue).

Chen, G. (in press). Evaluating the core: Critical assessment of core self-evaluations theory. Journal of Organizational Behavior.

Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325–334.CrossRef

Crampton, S. M., & Wagner, J. A., I. I. I. (1994). Percept-percept inflation in microorganizational research: An investigation of prevalence and effect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 67–76.CrossRef

Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2006). Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration. British Journal of Management, 17, 263–282.CrossRef

Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256.PubMedCrossRef

Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs in organizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 144–192.CrossRef

Edwards, J. R. (2011). The fallacy of formative measurement. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 370–388.CrossRef

Ferris, D. L., Rosen, C. C., Johnson, R. E., Brown, D. J., Risavy, S., & Heller, D. (2011). Approach or avoidance (or both?): Integrating core self-evaluations within an approach/avoidance framework. Personnel Psychology, 64, 137–161.CrossRef

Franke, G. R., Preacher, K. J., & Rigdon, E. E. (2008). Proportional structural effects of formative indicators. Journal of Business Research, 61, 1229–1237.CrossRef

Gerbing, D. W., Hamilton, J. G., & Freeman, E. B. (1994). A large-scale second-order structural equation model of the influence of management participation on organizational planning benefits. Journal of Management, 20, 859–885.

Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.CrossRef

Harrison, D. A., McLaughlin, M. E., & Coalter, T. M. (1996). Context, cognition, and common method variance: Psychometric and verbal protocol evidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 246–261.CrossRef

Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L. (2006). How important are job attitudes? Meta-analytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 305–325.CrossRef

Jenkins, M., & Griffith, R. (2004). Using personality constructs to predict performance: Narrow or broad bandwidth. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19, 255–269.CrossRef

Johnson, J. W. (2000). A heuristic method for estimating the relative weight of predictor variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35, 1–19.CrossRef

Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., & Levy, P. E. (2008). Getting to the core of core self-evaluations: A review and recommendations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 391–413.CrossRef

Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., Chang, C. -H., Djurdjevic, E., & Taing, M. U. (in press-a). Recommendations for improving the construct clarity of higher-order multidimensional constructs. Human Resource Management Review.

Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., & Djurdjevic, E. (in press-b). Assessing the impact of common method variance on higher-order multidimensional constructs. Journal of Applied Psychology.

Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 151–188.

Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2003). The core self-evaluations scale: Development of a measure. Personnel Psychology, 56, 303–331.CrossRef

Kelley, T. L. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. Yonkers, New York: World Book Company.

Kline, T. J. B., Sulsky, L. M., & Rever-Moriyama, S. D. (2002). Common method variance and specification errors: A practical approach to detection. Journal of Psychology, 134, 401–421.CrossRef

Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Academy of Management Review, 23, 741–755.

LeBreton, J. M., Hargis, M. B., Griepentrog, B., Oswald, F. L., & Ployhart, R. E. (2007). A multidimensional approach for evaluating variables in organizational research and practice. Personnel Psychology, 60, 475–498.CrossRef

Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 3–30.CrossRef

MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Jarvis, C. B. (2005). The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 710–730.PubMedCrossRef

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90.PubMedCrossRef

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. -Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.PubMedCrossRef

Richardson, H. A., Simmering, M. J., & Sturman, M. C. (2009). A tale of three perspectives: Examining post hoc statistical techniques for detection and correction of common method variance. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 762–800.CrossRef

Rosen, C. C., Chang, C. H., Johnson, R. E., & Levy, P. E. (2009). Perceptions of the organizational context and psychological contract breach: Assessing competing perspectives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 202–217.CrossRef

Rushton, J. P., & Irwing, P. (2008). A general factor of personality (GFP) from two meta-analyses of the Big Five: Digman (1997) and Mount, Barrick, Scullen, and Rounds (2005). Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 679–683.CrossRef

Schmitt, N. (2004). Beyond the Big Five: Increases in understanding and practical utility. Human Performance, 17, 349–359.CrossRef

Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.CrossRef

Spector, P. E. (1992). Summated rating scales. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Taing, M. U., Johnson, R. E., & Jackson, E. M. (2010, August). On the nature of core self-evaluation: A formative or reflective construct? Paper presented at the 70th Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Montreal, Quebec.

Tonidandel, S., & LeBreton, J. M. (2011). Relative importance analysis: A useful supplement to regression analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 1–9.CrossRef

Tonidandel, S., LeBreton, J. M., & Johnson, J. W. (2009). Statistical significance tests for relative weights. Psychological Methods, 14, 387–399.PubMedCrossRef

Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1989). Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artifact? Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 462–468.CrossRef

Williams, L. J., Hartman, N., & Cavazotte, F. (2010). Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 477–514.CrossRef

Titel: To Aggregate or Not to Aggregate: Steps for Developing and Validating Higher-Order Multidimensional Constructs
verfasst von: Russell E. Johnson
Christopher C. Rosen
Chu-Hsiang Chang
Publikationsdatum: 01.09.2011
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology / Ausgabe 3/2011
Print ISSN: 0889-3268
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-353X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9238-1

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2011

Dispositional Antecedents of Demonstration and Usefulness of Voice Behavior

Relationship Between Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty on the Internet

Logit Model to Predict Outcomes of Litigated Employee Obesity Cases

The Influence of Psychological Contract Breach on Temporary Workers’ Commitment and Behaviors: A Multiple Agency Perspective

Expecting the Worst: Moderating Effects of Social Cynicism on the Relationships Between Relationship Conflict and Negative Affective Reactions

The Multidimensional Nature of Continuance Commitment: Commitment Owing to Economic Exchanges Versus Lack of Employment Alternatives