polychronic tendency models a gender contrast study
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Polychronic Tendency Models: A Gender Contrast Study

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 20

Polychronic Tendency Models: A Gender Contrast Study - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 91 Views
  • Uploaded on

Polychronic Tendency Models: A Gender Contrast Study. by Jay D. Lindquist Western Michigan University and Carol F. Kaufman-Scarborough Rutgers University. Introduction. Polychronic and monochronic behavior (time use) Studies from the 1950’s on Hall (1959)

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Polychronic Tendency Models: A Gender Contrast Study' - ulysses-watkins


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
polychronic tendency models a gender contrast study

Polychronic Tendency Models: A Gender Contrast Study

by

Jay D. Lindquist

Western Michigan University

and

Carol F. Kaufman-Scarborough

Rutgers University

introduction
Introduction
  • Polychronic and monochronic behavior (time use)
  • Studies from the 1950’s on
    • Hall (1959)
    • Economic resource (1970’s – early 1990’s)
    • Working women juggling work, social, marketplace, and family demands (1980’s on)
    • Polychronic scale development begins (late 1980’s)
  • The Polychronic Attitude Index (PAI) (1991)
polychronic monochronic chronological background
Polychronic – MonochronicChronological Background
  • Hall’s conceptualization
  • Economic resource and fixed time budget approach
  • Time pressure and convenience impact
polychronic monochronic chronological background1
Polychronic – MonochronicChronological Background
  • Direct and indirect measures
    • F-A-S-T Scale
    • Time Dimension Scales
    • Time Structure Questionnaire
    • Time Management Behavior Scale
    • Polychronic Attitude Index
polychronic monochronic chronological background2
Polychronic – MonochronicChronological Background
  • Multidisciplinary Constructs
    • Modified PAI (PAI3)
    • Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV)
research directions
Research Directions
  • Simultaneous Multiple Activity
  • Activity changing behavior
  • What are “activities”
  • Need for new models
the study
The Study
  • Objectives – develop and compare gender-specific models of polychronic tendency
  • Hypothesis 1 – models will consist of both SMA and AC items
the study1
The Study
  • Hypothesis 2 – the two gender-specific models will differ from one another
methodology
Methodology
  • Phase I
    • N = 257 adults (f = 118, m = 139)
    • Develop pool of potential SMA and AC items
    • Assure respondents have same “activities” understanding (physically active, mentally active, monitoring, and eye/ear attention)
item pool
Item Pool
  • SMA items
    • JUGLTWO, SHTRYTWO, COMFTWO, TRYTWO, DOTWO, ENJOYTWO, ENERGTWO, EFFICTWO, EFFECTWO, APROVTWO
  • AC items
    • CHGMORE, COMFCHG, ENJOYCHG, ENERGCHG, EFFICCHG, EFFECCHG, APROVCHG
methodology1
Methodology
  • Phase II
    • N = 386 adults (f = 219, m = 167)
    • Develop best fit, parsimonious gender-specific models
    • Compare models
items in best fit models
Items in “Best Fit” Models
  • SMA – Women
    • JUGLTWO, SHTRYTWO, COMFTWO, ENJOYTWO and EFFICTWO
  • SMA – Men
    • JUGLTWO, SHTRYTWO, COMFTWO, and DOTWO
items in best fit models1
Items in “Best Fit” Models
  • AC – Women
    • CHGMORE and COMFCHG
  • AC – Men
    • ENERGCHG, EFFECCHG and APROVCHG
conclusions
Conclusions
  • Hypothesis 1 – Accepted
    • “Best fit” gender-specific models of polychronic tendency include both SMA and AC items
  • Hypothesis 2 – Accepted
    • Gender-specific models of polychronic tendency are different
discussion
Discussion
  • SMA items JUGLTWO and COMFTWO part of PAI scale
  • SMA items JUGLTWO, SHTRYTWO and COMFTWO part of both models
  • No AC items in common across two models
discussion1
Discussion
  • Ratio of SMA to AC items: women (4 to 3), men (5 to 2)
  • Affective items (JUGLTWO, COMFTWO, ENJOYTWO, COMFCHG) ratio women to men is 4 to 2
  • CHGMORE only shows in women’s model
discussion2
Discussion
  • Perceived outcome items (EFFICTWO, ENERGTWO, EFFECCHG, APROVCHG) ratio women to men is 1 to 3
  • Scale ranges and means: women (12 to 49, 36.4); men (7 to 49, 34.8); n = 198 (women); n = 150 (men); midpoints 30.5/28 (w/m)
implications
Implications
  • Limitations
    • No social desirability check
    • No discriminant, convergent or nomological validity checks
    • General, not situation-specific models
    • Tests needed to show practical marketplace applications
ad