在不同的文化和语言背景下评估三种LMX工具的维度

IF 0.9 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Psihologija Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.2298/psi191011019g
A. Grobler, Rose Mathafena Boitumelo
{"title":"在不同的文化和语言背景下评估三种LMX工具的维度","authors":"A. Grobler, Rose Mathafena Boitumelo","doi":"10.2298/psi191011019g","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multiple versions of the Leader-member exchange (LMX) instruments are widely utilized for exploring the quality of exchange between the leader/supervisor and the employees in leadership studies. Despite widespread usage, validation studies outside the USA are scarce. The purpose of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of three versions of LMX instruments in the South African context. The factor structure, validity, and reliability of the respective versions were explored. The sample comprised of employees from the private (3598) and public (2640) sectors, from 106 organizations, across three independent studies. A three-factor structure was reported for 11 and 12 item instruments, which is different from the original four factor structure. The unidimensional 7 item instrument reported exceptionally good fit. The results of this study are useful for leadership researchers within the South African context, as they can use the LMX instruments with confidence, but it raises a question about the common practice of using foreign developed instruments for research purposes without testing its transferability to that specific context.","PeriodicalId":45301,"journal":{"name":"Psihologija","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the dimensionality of three LMX instruments within a diverse cultural and linguistic context\",\"authors\":\"A. Grobler, Rose Mathafena Boitumelo\",\"doi\":\"10.2298/psi191011019g\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Multiple versions of the Leader-member exchange (LMX) instruments are widely utilized for exploring the quality of exchange between the leader/supervisor and the employees in leadership studies. Despite widespread usage, validation studies outside the USA are scarce. The purpose of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of three versions of LMX instruments in the South African context. The factor structure, validity, and reliability of the respective versions were explored. The sample comprised of employees from the private (3598) and public (2640) sectors, from 106 organizations, across three independent studies. A three-factor structure was reported for 11 and 12 item instruments, which is different from the original four factor structure. The unidimensional 7 item instrument reported exceptionally good fit. The results of this study are useful for leadership researchers within the South African context, as they can use the LMX instruments with confidence, but it raises a question about the common practice of using foreign developed instruments for research purposes without testing its transferability to that specific context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45301,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psihologija\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psihologija\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2298/psi191011019g\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psihologija","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2298/psi191011019g","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

领导-成员交换(LMX)工具的多种版本在领导研究中被广泛用于探索领导/主管与员工之间的交换质量。尽管广泛使用,但在美国以外的验证研究很少。本研究的目的是分析三种版本的LMX工具在南非的心理测量特性。探讨了各版本的因子结构、效度和信度。样本包括来自106个组织的私营部门(3598人)和公共部门(2640人)的员工,来自三个独立的研究。在11项和12项量表中采用三因素结构,与原来的四因素结构不同。单维7项仪器报告了非常好的契合度。本研究的结果对南非背景下的领导力研究人员很有用,因为他们可以自信地使用LMX工具,但它提出了一个问题,即使用外国开发的工具进行研究目的而不测试其可转移性到该特定背景的普遍做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the dimensionality of three LMX instruments within a diverse cultural and linguistic context
Multiple versions of the Leader-member exchange (LMX) instruments are widely utilized for exploring the quality of exchange between the leader/supervisor and the employees in leadership studies. Despite widespread usage, validation studies outside the USA are scarce. The purpose of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of three versions of LMX instruments in the South African context. The factor structure, validity, and reliability of the respective versions were explored. The sample comprised of employees from the private (3598) and public (2640) sectors, from 106 organizations, across three independent studies. A three-factor structure was reported for 11 and 12 item instruments, which is different from the original four factor structure. The unidimensional 7 item instrument reported exceptionally good fit. The results of this study are useful for leadership researchers within the South African context, as they can use the LMX instruments with confidence, but it raises a question about the common practice of using foreign developed instruments for research purposes without testing its transferability to that specific context.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psihologija
Psihologija PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
20
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信