The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Further Validation of the Perceptions of Politics Scale (Pops): A Multiple Sample Investigation
Abstract
Although political behavior in organizations is ubiquitous, measuring it is often difficult. In one attempt to create such a measure, Kacmar and Ferris (1991) developed and evaluated the psychometric properties of the Perceptions of Politics Scale (POPS). Later, Nye and Witt (1993) examined the dimensionality of POPS and its construct validity by comparing it with the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support (SPOS; Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison & Sowa, 1986). The present research extends these previous studies by using structural equation modeling to evaluate the dimensional, reliability, and validity of POPS across three different studies utilizing nine different samples for a total of 2758 respondents. Results suggested that some of the original POPS items were ineffective and needed to be removed or replaced. Hence, some of the original items were deleted and additional items were generated and tested to produce a refined and revised version of POPS.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/bf02723327 · Cited by 26,163
Perceived organizational support.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500 · Cited by 10,023
Cited by
Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698 · Cited by 7,592
Entrepreneurial alertness in the pursuit of new opportunities
Tang, J., Kacmar, K. M. (., & Busenitz, L. (2012) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.07.001 · Cited by 1,013
Self-citationEisenberger, R., Karagonlar, G., Stinglhamber, F., Neves, P., Becker, T. E., Gonzalez-Morales, M. G., & Steiger-Mueller, M. (2010) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0020858 · Cited by 652
Fonner, K. L., & Roloff, M. E. (2010) · Journal of Applied Communication Research · doi:10.1080/00909882.2010.513998 · Cited by 514
Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., & Buckley, M. R. (2017) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2052 · Cited by 335
Metadata
- Authors
- Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publishing
- Published
- 1997-01-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 627-658
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1903147065
- Cited by
- 559
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Further Validation of the Perceptions of Politics Scale (Pops): A Multiple Sample Investigation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0149-2063(97)90019-2
- The paper
- Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1997). Further Validation of the Perceptions of Politics Scale (Pops): A Multiple Sample Investigation. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2063(97)90019-2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
