CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Psychometric Methodologies and TestingJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorReliability and Agreement in Measurement

The effect of adding items to scales: An illustrative case of LMX

Keller, Tiffany, Dansereau, Fred·2001·Organizational Research Methods
DOI 10.1177/109442810142003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this article, the authors examine whether different results occur when items are added to a scale. Because different measures of leader-member exchange (LMX) have included different numbers of items, the authors used the LMX scale. The results, consistent across two studies, support the hypothesis that results based on earlier versions of the LMX measure differ from those of subsequent scales where items were added. The implications of this type of finding for scale development and meta-analysis are discussed. It is suggested that validity as well as reliability be considered when adding new items to scales.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/109442810142003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When items are added or dropped from a scale, the psychometric properties change.

    “It is not appropriate to develop one's own short version, because when items are added or dropped from a scale, the psychometric properties change (see Bono and McNamara (2011) and Keller and Dansereau (2001)).”

    From Servant Leadership: A systematic review and call for future research (2019) · cites this paper as Keller and Dansereau (2001)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keller, T., & Dansereau, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Richmond
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
Venue
Organizational Research Methods
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2001-04
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
131-143
ISSN
  • 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7425
DOI
10.1177/109442810142003
OpenAlex
W2082753329
Cited by
43
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Organizational Research Methods (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
leader-member exchange, scale development, measurement validity, reliability statistics, meta-analysis

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