The Construct Validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Multisample and Longitudinal Evidence

By P. Seppälä, S. Mauno, T. Feldt, J. Hakanen, Ulla Kinnunen *, Asko Tolvanen, Wilmar B. Schaufeli. 2008

662 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b90110cb4f720031422d320ccf3c3e7d5bac613d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The role of employee engagement in the relationship between job design and task performance, citizenship and deviant behaviours (2013, methodology): “The measure of engagement used in the present study has been shown to exhibit high internal consistency and test–retest reliability as well as discriminant, convergent and construct validity (Hallberg and Schaufeli 2006; Schaufeli et al. 2006; Seppala et al. 2009; Christian et al. 2011).”
The Associations between Ethical Organizational Culture, Burnout, and Engagement: A Multilevel Study (2014, methodology): “The shortened version (using 9 of the original 17 items) of the UWES has proven to be a valid measure, and the three scale scores have good internal consistency and test–retest reliability (Schaufeli et al. 2006; Seppälä et al. 2009).”
Linking Managerial Coaching and Leader–Member Exchange on Work Engagement and Performance (2018, methodology): “Work engagement was measured with the validated Finnish version (Seppälä et al. 2009) of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale with nine items (Schaufeli et al.”
Recovery experiences as moderators between psychosocial work characteristics and occupational well-being (2009, methodology): “Work engagement was measured by the scales of vigour and dedication from the 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova, 2006 ), which has also been found to be valid in Finnish occupational samples (Seppala et al, 2009 ).”
Work Engagement. What Do We Know and Where Do We Go (2012, background): “Generally speaking, scores on the UWES are relatively stable across time, ranging between .82 and .86 across a three-year time interval (Seppälä et al., 2009).”
Who are you and what do you value? Investigating the role of personality traits and customer-perceived value in online customer engagement (2016, positive): “…has also been adopted by other engagement research areas, namely employee engagement (Macy & Schneider, 2008; May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004), job and organisation engagement (Koyuncu, Burke, & Fiksenbaum, 2006; Saks, 2006; Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma, & Bakker, 2002; Seppälä et al., 2009).”
Teachers’ Engagement at Work: An International Validation Study (2012, background): “Previous studies have shown the UWES to display acceptable levels of reliability and validity primarily with participants from European countries (e.g., Bakker, Hakanen, Demerouti, & Xanthopoulou, 2007; Hakanen, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2006; Schaufeli et al., 2006; Seppälä et al., 2009), with the one-f”
How are women's glass ceiling beliefs related to career success? (2012, background): “The strong psychometric properties of the UWES-9 were shown in a study (N = 9,404, 65% female) of health care workers, young/experienced managers, teachers/education administrators and dentists (Seppala et al., 2009).”
Dissent Expression as an Indicator of Work Engagement and Intention to Leave (2012, background): “…recommended treating the scale as unidimensional when the focus of the research is work engagement in general— stating that “the high correlations between the three factors indicate substantial overlap between them, and thus restrict their use as separate dimensions” (Seppälä et al., 2009, p. 476).”