Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Crowder, B.
Right arrow Articles by Michael, W. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Development and Validation of a Short Form of a Multidimensional Self-Concept Measure for High Technology Employees

Betty Crowder

Hewlett Packard Company

William B. Michael

University of Southern California

For a sample of 162 employees in a major electronics/computer company, evidence is presented concerning the reliability and construct validity of six 15-item scales in a shortened form of a measure entitled Dimensions of Self-Concept-Form W (DOSC-W). For the six scales of Level of Aspiration, Anxiety, Job Interest and Satisfaction, Leadership and Initiative, Identification versus Alienation, and Job Stress, representing the names hypothesized for the six underlying constructs of the DOSC-W, internal-consistency reliabilities ranged from .86 to .92, and intercorrelations among them varied between -.40 and .53. Orthogonal and oblique exploratory factor analyses of 18 subtests (three 5-item subtests for each factor scale) provided highly similar 6-factor solutions with clearly evident simple structure lending support to the validity of the six constructs. Confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analyses showed that among many alternative models, the 6-factor oblique model afforded the best fit in terms of accounting for the largest proportion of covariance.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 51, No. 2, 447-454 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164491512019


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
C. M. Paik and W. B. Michael
The Reliability and Construct Validity of Scores on the Six-Factor Dosc (Dimensions of Self-Concept) Scale for College Students
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2000; 60(4): 617 - 627.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
C. Paik and W. B. Michael
A Construct Validity Investigation of Scores on a Japanese Version of an Academic Self-Concept Scale for Secondary School Students
Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 1999; 59(1): 98 - 110.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
E. F. Smith, W. B. Michael, and B. Gribbons
A Construct Validity Study of a Self-Concept Scale for a Sample of Hospital Nurses
Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1997; 57(3): 494 - 504.
[Abstract]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
B. M. Foraker and W. B. Michael
Reliability and Construct Validity of the Dimensions of Self-Concept (Dosc)-Form W Measure for an Air Force Sample
Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1994; 54(2): 409 - 416.
[Abstract]