{"title":"改良一般员工幸福感量表","authors":"B. Winston","doi":"10.4018/978-1-7998-7665-6.ch017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Taylor et al. evaluated Dupuy's general employee well-being measurement instrument and pointed out two concerns: a combination of positive and negative item wording and two different measurement response methods. Taylor et al. collected new data, ran a principal component analysis, and found three of Dupuy's five reported scales. In this study, the author reworded Taylor et al.'s final 18 items so that all items were worded positively, used a common measurement response, and removed double-barreled wording, which Taylor et al. did not note. The author of this current chapter conducted two studies. The first study's analysis of the new data produced a single eight-item scale with Cronbach alpha of .96 that explained 77% of the variance. The second study used confirmatory factor analysis that showed a four-item scale with GFI = 0.98, AGFI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.13, and Chi-square = 9.96, df = 9, p < 0.000. The four-item scale had a Cronbach alpha of 0.86.","PeriodicalId":190605,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Human Resources Management and Organizational Development","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modified General Employee Well-Being Scale\",\"authors\":\"B. Winston\",\"doi\":\"10.4018/978-1-7998-7665-6.ch017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Taylor et al. evaluated Dupuy's general employee well-being measurement instrument and pointed out two concerns: a combination of positive and negative item wording and two different measurement response methods. Taylor et al. collected new data, ran a principal component analysis, and found three of Dupuy's five reported scales. In this study, the author reworded Taylor et al.'s final 18 items so that all items were worded positively, used a common measurement response, and removed double-barreled wording, which Taylor et al. did not note. The author of this current chapter conducted two studies. The first study's analysis of the new data produced a single eight-item scale with Cronbach alpha of .96 that explained 77% of the variance. The second study used confirmatory factor analysis that showed a four-item scale with GFI = 0.98, AGFI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.13, and Chi-square = 9.96, df = 9, p < 0.000. The four-item scale had a Cronbach alpha of 0.86.\",\"PeriodicalId\":190605,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Human Resources Management and Organizational Development\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Human Resources Management and Organizational Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-7665-6.ch017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Human Resources Management and Organizational Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-7665-6.ch017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Taylor et al. evaluated Dupuy's general employee well-being measurement instrument and pointed out two concerns: a combination of positive and negative item wording and two different measurement response methods. Taylor et al. collected new data, ran a principal component analysis, and found three of Dupuy's five reported scales. In this study, the author reworded Taylor et al.'s final 18 items so that all items were worded positively, used a common measurement response, and removed double-barreled wording, which Taylor et al. did not note. The author of this current chapter conducted two studies. The first study's analysis of the new data produced a single eight-item scale with Cronbach alpha of .96 that explained 77% of the variance. The second study used confirmatory factor analysis that showed a four-item scale with GFI = 0.98, AGFI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.13, and Chi-square = 9.96, df = 9, p < 0.000. The four-item scale had a Cronbach alpha of 0.86.