Spotify sign up with facebook3/23/2023 However, when a construct is unambiguous or narrow in scope, the use of single items can be appropriate and should not necessarily be considered unsound ( Wanous et al., 1997). Of course, there are many instances in which single-item measures would be a poor choice – for example, in research aiming to capture the breadth of human personality or emotion. These articles did much to alleviate the stigma surrounding single-item measures, but even today, many researchers remain unconvinced that single-item measures can provide valid and reliable assessments of important psychological phenomena. However, a series of articles published in the late 1990s and 2000s began to challenge the conventional view that single-item measures are an unsound approach to measuring cognitive and affective outcomes ( Bergkvist & Rossiter, 2007 Fuchs & Diamantopoulos, 2009 Jordan & Turner, 2008 Loo, 2002 Nagy, 2002 Wanous et al., 1997). As one research team noted, “it is virtually impossible to get a journal article accepted … unless it includes multiple-item measures of the main constructs” ( Bergkvist & Rossiter, 2007, p. For a long time, adopting single-item measures was considered one of the surest methods of receiving a letter of rejection from journal editors ( Wanous et al., 1997). Single-item measures have a bad reputation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |