P. 1
Kull- Dissertation - Book - Final

Kull- Dissertation - Book - Final

|Views: 71|Likes:
Published by Tom Kull

More info:

Published by: Tom Kull on Jul 25, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/28/2011

pdf

text

original

The final test conducted has been termed the correlated uniqueness test,

where construct item errors between constructs of concern are allowed to covary

in a CFA (Podsakoff, 2003). The effect of free error covariance is then assessed

and, if necessary, controlled. In a CFA this equates to certain free off-diagonal

elements in the Θδ matrix. Because the construct QO

was the only true

exogenous factor, its four item errors were free to correlate with the other 12

endogenous construct item errors. Constraints were then placed upon each free

path to equate to zero but were allowed free if the LM test revealed a significant

impact. Comparisons were made with and without correlated uniqueness

105

Table 5-6: Effect of Correlated Uniqueness - Common Method Variance
(CMV) Control

Before CMV control

After CMV control

Fit indices

X2

= 5822 (98); NFI=.941;
CFI=.942; RMSEA=.065

X2

= 3762 (61); NFI=.962;
CFI=.963; RMSEA=.067

Question

Loading

Error
Variance

R2

Loading

Error
Variance

R2

Organization-level Quality Practices
Q2

0.608

0.794

0.370

0.634

0.773

0.403

Q3

0.753

0.658

0.567

0.770

0.639

0.592

Q9

0.606

0.796

0.367

0.568

0.823

0.322

Q13

0.615

0.788

0.379

0.587

0.809

0.345

Workgroup-level Quality Practices
Q11

0.782

0.623

0.612

0.773

0.635

0.597

Q26

0.437

0.900

0.191

0.429

0.903

0.184

Q30

0.804

0.594

0.647

0.807

0.590

0.652

Q31

0.806

0.592

0.649

0.814

0.581

0.662

Organization-level Cooperative Values
Q14

0.594

0.804

0.353

0.608

0.794

0.369

Q16

0.656

0.755

0.430

0.637

0.771

0.406

Q21

0.503

0.864

0.253

0.497

0.868

0.247

Q25

0.697

0.717

0.486

0.705

0.709

0.497

Workgroup-level Work Performance
Q4

0.841

0.541

0.707

0.839

0.545

0.703

Q17

0.604

0.797

0.365

0.595

0.804

0.354

Q32

0.859

0.511

0.739

0.870

0.493

0.757

Q33

0.661

0.750

0.437

0.656

0.754

0.431

controls. Without error covariances χ2

(df) was 5,821 (98) with a consistent

Akaiki information criteria (CAIC) of 4790. The LM test suggested 37 of the 48

possible Θδ(en,ex) elements should be freed. Upon doing so the result was a χ2

(df) of 3762 (61) with a CAIC of 3120. This represented about a 35% model

improvement – large enough to warrant CMV control. Such a control was

accomplished through retention of the 37 free error covariances when computing

the structure matrix used for calculating factor scores. For illustrative purposes

Table 5-6 reveals the change in factor loadings as a result of CMV-control. As

shown, some loadings increase while others decrease. An important note is in

relation to the discriminant validity concern between QO

and VO

noted earlier.

106

Prior to CMV control the ∆χ2

was 26.89 (see Table 5-4, test #2), indicating a

slight but significant discrimination. However, with CMV control the ∆χ2

value

increased to 105.39, indicating an improvement in discrimination. This process

controlled for method variance, thereby giving higher confidence towards

inferring correlations to be of causal and not methodological origins. Because

singular values for each construct are required for multilevel analysis, a factor

scoring process was used and is discussed in the next section.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->