Search

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight the effect of supervisor openness on employee voice among middle management employees in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The authors develop a model to examine the mediating role of job satisfaction and employee engagement in the SME context. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional survey design was used to gather data from respondents who worked in SMEs (N=202). Exploratory factor analysis was used for dimensionality assessment of the voice measure. Mediation analysis was used to examine a two-mediator model to investigate the effects of engagement and job satisfaction on voice, and the degree these variables mediated the relationship of supervisor openness to ideas with employee voice. Findings Results revealed that supervisor openness is positively associated with job satisfaction and employee engagement, but only engagement was a facilitating variable that stimulated employee voice. Research limitations/implications Middle management members can be a conduit or inhibitor of the free flow of information. Yet, research has tended to ignore the role of middle managers in voice research. Moreover, within the specific organizational context of SMEs, greater understanding of both the antecedents and mediators to voice behavior is likely to impact the development of specific HR practices that focus on engagement and better facilitate two-way communication between supervisors and employees. Originality/value This work refines the understanding of the role employee engagement has on employee voice in the context of SMEs.

Student effort on large-scale assessments has important implications on the interpretation and use of scores to guide decisions. Within the United States, English Language Learners (ELLs) generally are outperformed on large-scale assessments by non-ELLs, prompting research to examine factors associated with test performance. There is a gap in the literature regarding the test-taking motivation of ELLs compared to non-ELLs and whether existing measures have similar psychometric properties across groups. The Student Opinion Survey (SOS; Sundre, 2007) was designed to be administered after completion of a large-scale assessment to operationalize students’ test-taking motivation. Based on data obtained on 5,257 (41.8% ELL) 10th grade students, study purpose was to test the measurement invariance of the SOS across ELLs and non-ELLs based on completion of low- and high-stakes assessments. Preliminary item analyses supported the removal of two SOS items (Items 3 and 7) that resulted in improved internal consistency for each of the two SOS subscales: Importance, Effort. A subsequent multi-sample confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) supported the measurement invariance of the scale’s two-factor model across language groups, indicating it met strict factorial invariance (Meredith 1993). A follow-up latent means analysis found that ELLs had higher effort on both the low- and high-stakes assessment with a small effect size. Effect size estimates indicated negligible differences on the importance factor. Although the instrument can be expected to function similarly across diverse language groups, which may have direct utility of test users and research into factors associated with large-scale test performance, continued research is recommended. Implications for SOS use in applied and research settings are discussed.

The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) is a measure of university students’ approach to learning. Original evaluation of the scale’s psychometric properties was based on a sample of Hong Kong university students’ scores. The purpose of this study was to test and cross-validate the R-SPQ-2F factor structure, based on separate cohort data (Cohort 1: n = 1,490; Cohort 2: n = 1,533), among students attending a university in the United States. Factor analytic results did not support the scale’s original factor structure, instead suggesting an alternative four-factor model of the scale data. In the cross-validation study, multisample confirmatory factor analysis results indicated that the scale’s measurement model parameters (e.g., factor loadings) were invariant across independent samples. Despite support for the scale’s respecified factor structure for Western university students, continued research is recommended to improve the scale’s psychometric properties. Implications for test score use and interpretation are discussed.

The Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT™) is an individually administered test of intelligence for individuals ranging in age from 11 to 85+ years. The item response theory—likelihood ratio procedure, based on the two-parameter logistic model, was used to detect differential item functioning (DIF) in the KAIT across males and females in the standardization sample. Root mean squared differences and item parameter differences were used to indicate the magnitude of DIF and identify which group the item parameter favored. A z test of proportion differences was conducted to determine if the number of parameters exhibiting gender DIF exceeded the number expected by chance, estimated by randomly dividing the sample in half and repeating the analyses. Of the 176 item parameters examined, 42 (24%) lacked invariance, with most items reporting uniform DIF. Implications for test score interpretation and future research are discussed.

Multisample confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) and latent mean structures analysis (LMS) were used to test measurement invariance and latent mean differences on the Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Scale™ (KAIT) across males and females in the standardization sample. MCFA found that the parameters of the KAIT two-factor model were invariant across groups. A follow-up LMS found intercept differences on the Memory for Block Designs, Famous Faces, Auditory Comprehension, and Logical Steps subtests, indicating low to moderately higher expected scores for males. Thus, latent means were not tested for invariance. Although the KAIT two-factor model met partial measurement invariance, it did not demonstrate strong factorial invariance. Implications for test score interpretation are discussed.

Dimensionality assessment using the full-information item bifactor model for graded response data is provided. The model applies to data in which each item relates to a general factor and one group factor. Specifically, alternative model specification within item response theory (IRT) is shown to test a scale's factor structure. For illustrative purposes, the bifactor model and competing IRT models were fit to the data of separate cohorts of incoming college students (Cohort 1, n = 1,490; Cohort 2, n = 1,533) to test the dimensionality of an adapted version of the State Metacognitive Inventory. Overall, the bifactor analysis did not strongly support distinct group factors after accounting for the general factor. Instead, results suggested conceptualizing the scale as unidimensional, indicating that scores should be based on the total scale, not subscales. Considerations related to the use of the bifactor IRT model are discussed.

This work-in-progress presents instruments that have been developed to assess team effectiveness for students in engineering classrooms. The instruments include: a) a 24-item self-report instrument (Team Effectiveness Scale) requiring students to indicate the degree their team worked together across the following domains: interdependency, goal-setting, potency, and learning; and b) a 6-item measure (Peer Assessment Scale) that asks students to rate each team member's contribution towards the functionality of their team. Evidence of scale psychometric properties are provided along with the relationship between peer assessment and team effectiveness scores and the degree to which scores on the team effectiveness scale discriminated between functional and dysfunctional teams, consistent with instructor judgments