Premium
An item‐level investigation of conceptual and empirical distinctiveness of proactivity constructs
Author(s) -
Cho Seonghee,
Carpenter Nichelle C.,
Zhang Bo
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
international journal of selection and assessment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.812
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1468-2389
pISSN - 0965-075X
DOI - 10.1111/ijsa.12287
Subject(s) - psychology , optimal distinctiveness theory , proactivity , construct validity , construct (python library) , social psychology , discriminant validity , exploratory factor analysis , incremental validity , variance (accounting) , empirical research , scale (ratio) , cognitive psychology , developmental psychology , psychometrics , statistics , computer science , internal consistency , business , physics , mathematics , accounting , quantum mechanics , programming language
Beyond the prior investigations that took scale‐level approaches to determining discriminant validity in proactivity constructs, the current study contributes a much‐needed interrogation of the items used to measure the behaviors in this domain. The substantive validity (SV) assessments (Study 1) showed that many of the items were judged to be inconsistent with the definition of the construct they assess or, alternatively, more consistent with the definition of a different construct in the domain. Further, exploratory factor analysis revealed the difficulty in empirically separating the four behaviors, while BiM results also advocated against the unique variance of them after accounting for a general factor (Study 2). Altogether, our results show that the items are partly to blame for the empirical redundancy issue.