1 / 12

The gap between actual and desired complexity of work - different ways to assess difference-scores

The gap between actual and desired complexity of work - different ways to assess difference-scores Rigotti, T., Schyns, B., Mohr, G. & Paul, T. Definition Theory I: The theory of action regulation Theory II: Problems in measuring differences Methods Results

joylyn
Download Presentation

The gap between actual and desired complexity of work - different ways to assess difference-scores

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The gap between actual and desired complexity of work - different ways to assess difference-scores Rigotti, T., Schyns, B., Mohr, G. & Paul, T. • Definition • Theory I: The theory of action regulation • Theory II: Problems in measuring differences • Methods • Results • Conlusions and Discussion

  2. Definition In my place of work In a good place of work Actual complexity of work Desired complexity of work Willingness to occupational change is defined as the experienced gap between actual complexity of work and the positive rating of complexity. Complexity describes higher regulation demands in the sense of action regulation theory.

  3. Theory I: The action-regulation theory General definition of action • „Action is goal-oriented behavior that is organized in specific ways by goals, information integration, plans, and feedback and can be regulated consciously or via routines.“ (Frese & Zapf, 1994) • Sensorimotor level, •  level of flexible action patterns, • intellectual level, • heuristic level Levels of action-regulation Completeness of tasks • Hierarchic and sequential completeness Enhancement of personality

  4. +2rExEyX Y Var(X) rXX + Var(Y) rYY - 2COV(XY) Var(X) + Var(Y) - 2COV(XY) Horst (1961) Williams & Zimmermann (1977) Theory II: Problems in measuring differences 1. „Un”reliability rDD‘ = • Coefficient Alpha (Cronbach, 1951) • Kruder-Richardson Formula 8 (Kruder & Richardson, 1937) 2. Regression-effect 3. Intervall-niveau of the measures

  5. Methods 1. Sample Age  42 SD 10.01 Range: 27 to 64 Sample size 55 + 29 = 84

  6. 48% 39% 36% Methods Analysis of the instrument  = .61  = .64  = .65

  7. Results Connections to other scales

  8. D1 = Y-X with Results The influence of various computational modells on significant scores

  9. Results Intercorrelation of the modells D1 = Y-X with

  10. Results T-Tests of variables with the various difference-score modells

  11. Conclusions • Taking into account that the pre- and posttest are highly linked and semantically different (not parallel) - the difference can be a reliable measure • The various concepts to compute a difference lead to different amounts of persons with a significant score • the simple difference seems to be an unbiased measure • "[...]although the meaning of a given difference score seems obvious, it is impossible to know what a difference score correlation means without looking at the relation between the components of the difference score and the outcome measure."(Griffin, Murray & Gonzales, 1999). • willingness to occupational change seems to be inhibited by internal stressors • Positive resources, like selfinitiativ, occupational ambition are connected with a lower experience of discripancy between actual and desired complexity of work

  12. Conclusions Willingness to occupational change seems to be more than the difference of its parts Thank you!

More Related