ABSTRACT

Two studies assessed the factor structures and predictive validities of alternative measures of workplace commitments. With the assisted living company and MTurk samples, Study 1 examined factor structures of the affective (AC), normative (NC), and continuance commitment (CC) scales and the unitary commitment scale. The internal structures of the AC and unitary commitment scales were sound, but problems were revealed in the structures of the NC and CC scales. Study 2 compared predictive validities of these scales to a simple one-item measure of attachment. Customer service employees of an energy company completed a commitment questionnaire. Subsequently, supervisors rated their job performance. The company provided objective performance metrics and 7 months of turnover records. Relative weight analyses revealed that predictive validities of the NC, CC, and unitary commitment scales were almost entirely subsumed by the AC scale and the attachment item when all measures competed to explain variance in outcomes. Considering the prevalence of use of the established measures, researchers should be aware of their deficiencies.

摘要

两项研究评估了工作场所承诺替代措施的因素结构和预测有效性。借助生活公司和MTurk的样本，研究1研究了情感（AC），规范（NC），持续承诺（CC）量表和统一承诺量表的因素结构。AC和统一承诺量表的内部结构是健全的，但是NC和CC量表的结构却发现了问题。研究2将这些量表的预测有效性与一种简单的依恋项进行了比较。一家能源公司的客户服务员工完成了一项承诺调查表。随后，主管对他们的工作表现进行了评分。该公司提供了客观的绩效指标和7个月的营业额记录。相对权重分析显示，NC的预测有效性 当所有衡量指标都可以竞争解释结果差异时，CC和统一承诺量表几乎完全被AC量表和附件项所涵盖。考虑到使用既定措施的普遍性，研究人员应意识到其不足之处。