Validity Evidence of the Team Psychological Safety Survey

The objective of this study was to adapt and investigate validity evidence for the Team Psychological Safety Survey for Brazil and to test its feasibility to emerge at the team level. A sample of 8,310 female workers answered the scale. Initial analyses indicated the single-factor solution fitness, with Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84. Confirmatory factor analysis model obtained good fitness coefficients, CFI = 0.995, RMSEA = 0.07. Emersion was viable due to group variance identified by and ICC calculations. The hypothesis stated that psychological safety correlates with perceived organizational practices and that differences exist between men and women’s practices. Findings support that the good practices positively related to psychological safety, with differences between gender, while a negative relationship with bad practices was partially confirmed. A quadratic trend was identified between organizational status and psychological safety. Results provide validity evidence for the survey for samples of Brazilian women.

Your Coefficient Alpha Is Probably Wrong, but Which Coefficient Omega Is Right? A Tutorial on Using R to Obtain Better Reliability Estimates

Measurement quality has recently been highlighted as an important concern for advancing a cumulative psychological science. An implication is that researchers should move beyond mechanistically reporting coefficient alpha toward more carefully assessing the internal structure and reliability of multi-item scales. Yet a researcher may be discouraged upon discovering that a prominent alternative to alpha, namely, coefficient omega, can be calculated in a variety of ways. In this Tutorial, I alleviate this potential confusion by describing alternative forms of omega and providing guidelines for choosing an appropriate omega estimate pertaining to the measurement of a target construct represented with a confirmatory factor analysis model. Several applied examples demonstrate how to compute different forms of omega in R.

A Confirmatory Factor Analysis Model of Academic Service-Learning Principles used in The Institute of Vocational Education in Thailand

The principle of service is at the heart of the academic service-learning of the Institute of Vocational Education, Bangkok, in Thailand. Therefore, the confirmatory factors of this academic service-learning were studied. The purpose of the research is to study the factors of academic service-learning principles. The results of the analysis of the confirmatory factors of the academic service-learning principles and the professions of the Institute of Vocational Education, Bangkok, were consistent with the empirical evidence. After the standard factors were considered, it was found that there were 5 confirmatory factors:; the principle of trustworthiness, the principle of confidence, the principle of instant response, the principle of regard, and the principle of objectiveness. The values of the factors were 0.84, 0.92, 0.90, 0.92, and 0.89, respectively. The statistical significance of all factors was .05

Is That Measure Really One-Dimensional?

Factorial validity is often assessed using confirmatory factor analysis. Model fit is commonly evaluated using the cutoff values for the fit indices proposed by Hu and Bentler (1999) . There is a body of research showing that those cutoff values cannot be generalized. Model fit does not only depend on the severity of misspecification, but also on nuisance parameters, which are independent of the misspecification. Using a simulation study, we demonstrate their influence on measures of model fit. We specified a severe misspecification, omitting a second factor, which signifies factorial invalidity. Measures of model fit showed only small misfit because nuisance parameters, magnitude of factor loadings and a balanced/imbalanced number of indicators per factor, also influenced the degree of misfit. Drawing from our results, we discuss challenges in the assessment of factorial validity.