skip to Main Content

FILL OUT ORDER NOW FORM

MAKE A PAYMENT

WRITER BEGINS WORKING ON ORDER

QUALITY CONTROL CHECK

DOWNLOAD COMPLETED ORDER

Interpreting Reliability Evidence for Psychological Measures One way to improve

Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, At affordable rates

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

Interpreting Reliability Evidence for Psychological Measures
One way to improve your understanding of material is to examine what others have done previously. For this assignment, you will read studies that made use of the measures introduced in Week 1 (organizational commitment, positive and negative affect, and psychological empowerment) and examine how other researchers evaluated the reliability of those measures.
To prepare for this Discussion:
Read the Learning Resources that pertain to reliability. In addition, reflect on what you learned about reliability last week.
Read the three articles for the measure you selected in Week 1 (organizational commitment, positive and negative affect, or psychological empowerment). Pay particular attention to the samples that the authors used, modifications they made to the original items or response options (if any), and the type(s) of reliability they computed.
Revisit the original article on the measure that you read in Week 1
Summarize the reliability evidence for the measure you selected in Week 1, using all three of the relevant readings in this week’s Learning Resources. In this summary, be sure to include the samples that the authors used, any modifications they made to items or response options, and the type(s) of reliability they computed. Then, based on the three readings and the original article from Week 1, draw conclusions about the reliability of the measure.
Be sure to support your posting with specific references from the Learning Resources and other scholarly sources you found.
RESOURCES:
Aldridge, V. K., Dovey, T. M., & Wade, A. (2017). Assessing test-retest reliability of psychological measures persistent methodological problems. European Psychologist, 22(4), 207–218. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000298
Organizational Commitment Readings
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49(3), 252–276. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0043
Dunham, R. B., Grube, J. A., & Castañeda, M. B. (1994). Organizational commitment: The utility of an integrative definition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 370–380. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.370
Merritt, S. (2012). The two-factor solution to Allen and Meyer’s (1990) Affective Commitment Scale: Effects of negatively worded items. Journal of Business & Psychology, 27(4), 421–436. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9252-3
Positive and Negative Affect Readings
Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2004). The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43(3), 245–265. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1348/0144665031752934
Heubeck, B. G., & Wilkinson, R. (2019). Is all fit that glitters gold? Comparisons of two, three and bi-factor models for Watson, Clark & Tellegen’s 20-item state and trait PANAS. Personality and Individual Differences, 144, 132–140. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.03.002
Serafini, K., Malin-Mayor, B., Nich, C., Hunkele, K., & Carroll, K. M. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) in a heterogeneous sample of substance users. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 42(2), 203–212. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.3109/00952990.2015.1133632
Psychological Empowerment Readings
Boudrias, J.-S., Gaudreau, P., & Laschinger, H. K. S. (2004). Testing the structure of psychological empowerment: Does gender make a difference? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(5), 861–877. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164404264840
Hancer, M., George, R. T., & Kim, B. (2005). An examination of dimensions of Psychological Empowerment Scale for Service Employees. Psychological Reports, 97(2), 667–672. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.97.2.667-672
Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 981–1003. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022676.supp
ARTICLES:
Allen, N. J., & John P. Meyer. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x
Carmines, E. G. & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Assessing reliability. In Reliability and validity assessment (pp. 37-51). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412985642
Carmines, E. G. & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Introduction. In Reliability and validity assessment (pp. 9-16). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412985642
Carmines, E. G. & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Classical test theory. In Reliability and validity assessment (pp. 29-35). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412985642
Shrout, P. E., & Lane, S. P. (2012). Reliability. In APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 1: Foundations, planning, measures, and psychometrics. (pp. 643–660). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13619-034
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

WHAT'S INCLUDED IN OUR ESSAY WRITING SERVICES

300 WORDS PER PAGE

To give you the best value for your money, we use a standard 300 words per page – up to 50 more words per page than other essay writing companies!

PLAGIARISM-FREE

All of our assignments are originally produced, unique, and free of plagiarism. All assignments go through plagiarism-detection software tools via a secure website before they’re sent to you.

FREE REVISIONS POLICY

If you want any changes made, it’s not a problem! Our comprehensive free revisions policy allows you to request a revision within (5) days at no extra charge.

24/7 SUPPORT

We have a team of friendly, helpful customer support staff who work around the clock, and are available to answer your questions or concerns 24/7, day or night.

Customer Testimonials