The Multifaceted Nature of Measurement Artifacts and Its Implications for Estimating Construct-Level Relationships

By Huy Le, Frank L. Schmidt, Dan J. Putka. 2009

97 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f8d865e37ec98ee93b9489debae9fa8aceb53d18

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

Common method bias in applied settings: The dilemma of researching in organizations (2020, background): “It can also lead to the underestimating of corrected correlations in meta-analysis because the reliability estimates may be artificially inflated due to method variance (Le et al., 2009).”
Tackling the Problem of Construct Proliferation (2016, methodology): “Le, Schmidt, and Putka (2009) show that when parallel full scales are available for analysis, the factor cor- relations derived from a CFA analysis and the coefficient of equivalence and stability (CES)–corrected correlations derived from the disattenuation formula should be nearly identical.”
The five-factor model of personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis. (2011, unknown): “Because coefficients alpha overestimate reliability in most cases, they underestimate true-score or construct-level relationships when used for correcting for measurement error (Le et al., 2009).”
A Cross-Level Test of Empowerment and Process Influences on Members’ Informal Learning and Team Commitment (2015, background): “While these differences are important to highlight, Le, Schmidt, and Putka (2009) note that in several research areas numerous scales have been developed to measure the same theoretical construct and conclusions are generally drawn about the construct in general and not about the specific scale.”
The problem of empirical redundancy of constructs in organizational research: An empirical investigation (2010, methodology): “This more complete conceptualization of measurement artifacts is conceptually identical to ‘‘best practice” applications of SEM and CFA, in which different measures of the same construct [instead of subscales (or item parcels) of the same measure] are used as indicators for the construct in SEM or C”
An Updated Guideline for Assessing Discriminant Validity (2020, methodology): “However, several articles point out that this may be a simplistic view of measurement error that only considers random and item-specific factor errors, ignoring time-specific transient errors (Le et al., 2009; Woehr et al., 2012).”
Measurement and Meaning in Information Systems and Organizational Research: Methodological and Philosophical Foundations (2011, methodology): “Common method variance has received detailed discussion in recent years in the information systems and organization research literatures (e.g., Le et al. 2007; Malhotra et al. 2006; Podsakoff et al. 2003a; Richardson et al. 2009; Sharma et al. 2009).”
A Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Intervention Programs Designed to Support Autonomy (2011, unknown): “…is important because estimates of reliability feature at least three types of measurement error that cause undercorrections and a downward bias in the meta-analysis (Hunter and Schmidt 2004)— namely, random response error, specific factor error, and transient error (Le et al. 2009, 2010).”