Excelsior Enterprises descriptive statistics part 1

Descriptive statistics such as maximum, minimum, means, standard deviations,

and variance were obtained for the interval-scaled items of the Excelsior
Enterprises study. The procedure is shown in Output 11.2 .

Output 11.2 Descriptive statistics: central tendencies and dispersions

From the menus, choose: Analyze

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptives

(Select the variables)

Options . . .

(Choose the relevant statistics needed)

Output

The results presented in the table in Output 11.2 indicate that:

there are missing observations for every item except for the items burnout10,
itl1 and itl2;

there are illegal codes for items jobchar1 (a 6 has been entered in at least one
cell), burnout3 (again, a 6
has been entered in at least one cell), and itl2 (a 5 has been entered in at least
one cell);
 the responses to each individual item have a good spread.

Appropriate actions were taken to correct the illegal entries. A further inspection
of the missing data revealed that every participant answered either all or the
vast majority of the questions. Therefore, no questionnaires were thrown out.
Missing data will be ignored during subsequent analyses.

From here, we can proceed with further detailed analyses to test the goodness of
our data.

Testing goodness of data

The reliability and validity of the measures can now be tested.

Reliability

As discussed in Chapter 7, the reliability of a measure is established by testing

for both consistency and stability. Consistency indicates how well the items
measuring a concept hang together as a set. Cronbach's alpha is a reliability
coefficient that indicates how well the items in a set are positively correlated to
one another. Cronbach's alpha is computed in terms of the average
intercorrelations among the items measuring the concept. The closer Cronbach's
alpha is to 1, the higher the internal consistency reliability.

Another measure of consistency reliability used in specific situations is the split-

half reliability coefficient. Since this reflects the correlations between two halves
of a set of items, the coefficients obtained will vary depending on how the scale
is split. Sometimes split-half reliability is obtained to test for consistency when
more than one scale, dimension, or factor, is assessed. The items across each of
the dimensions or factors are split, based on some predetermined logic
(Campbell, 1976). In almost every case, Cronbach's alpha is an adequate test of
internal consistency reliability. You will see later in this chapter how Cronbach's
alpha is obtained through computer analysis.

As discussed in Chapter 7, the stability of a measure can be assessed through

parallel form reliability and testretest
reliability. When a high correlation between two similar forms of a measure (see
Chapter 7) is obtained, parallel form
reliability is established. Testretest reliability can be established by computing
the correlation between the same tests administered at two different time
periods.

Excelsior Enterprises checking the reliability of the multi-item measures

Because distributive justice, burnout, job enrichment, and intention to leave were
measured with multi-item scales, the consistency of the respondents answers to
the scale items has to be tested for each measure. In Chapter 7, we explained
that Cronbach's alpha is a popular test of interitem consistency. Table 11.3
provides an overview of Cronbach's alpha for the four variables. This table
shows that the alphas were all well above 0.60.

Table 11.3 Reliability of the Excelsior Enterprises measures

Variable Number of items Cronbach's alpha Distributive justice 5 0.862

Job enrichment 4 0.715
Burnout 10 0.806
Intention to leave 2 0.866

In general, reliabilities less than 0.60 are considered to be poor, those in the 0.70
range, acceptable, and those over 0.80 good. Thus, the internal consistency
reliability of the measures used in this study can be considered to be acceptable
for the job enrichment measure and good for the other measures.

It is important to note that all the negatively worded items in the questionnaire
should first be reversed before the items are submitted for reliability tests.
Unless all the items measuring a variable are in the same direction, the
reliabilities obtained will be incorrect.

A sample of the result obtained for the Cronbach's alpha test for job enrichment,
together with instructions on how it is obtained, is shown in Output 11.3.

Output 11.3 Reliability analysis

From the menus, choose: Analyze

Scale

Reliability Analysis . . .

Select the variables constituting the scale.

Choose Model Alpha (this is the default option).

Click on Statistics.

Select Scale if item deleted under Descriptives

Output

Reliability statistics
Cronbach's alpha Number of items 0.715 4

The reliability of the job enrichment measure is presented in the first table in
Output 11.3. The second table provides an overview of the alphas if we take one
of the items out of the measure. For instance, it is shown that if the first item
(Jobchar1) is taken out, Cronbach's alpha of the new three-item measure will be
0.577. This means that the alpha will go down if we take item 1 out of our
measure. On the other hand, if we take out item 3, our alpha will go up and
become 0.851. Note that, in this case, we would not take out item 3 for two
reasons. First, our alpha is above 0.7 so we do not have to take any remedial
actions. Second, if we took item 3 out, the validity of our measure would
probably decrease. We did not include item 3 for nothing in the original measure!

If, however, our Cronbach's alpha was too low (under 0.60) then we could use
this table to find out which of the items would have to be removed from our
measure to increase the interitem consistency. Note that, usually, taking out an
item, although improving the reliability of our measure, affects the validity of our
measure in a negative way.

Now that we have established that the interitem consistency is satisfactory for
perceived equity, job enrichment, burnout, and intention to leave, the scores on
the original questions can be combined into a single score. For instance, a new
perceived equity score can be calculated from the scores on the five individual
perceived equity items (but only after items 1, 2, and 4 have been reverse
coded). Likewise, a new job enrichment score can be calculated from the
scores on the four individual job enrichment items, and so on. We have already
explained that this involves calculating the summed score (per case/participant)
and then dividing it by the number of items.
Validity
Factorial validity can be established by submitting the data for factor analysis.
The results of factor analysis (a multivariate technique) will confirm whether or
not the theorized dimensions emerge. Recall from Chapter 6 that measures are
developed by first delineating the dimensions so as to operationalize the
concept. Factor analysis reveals whether the dimensions are indeed tapped by
the items in the measure, as theorized. Criterion-related validity can be
established by testing for the power of the measure to differentiate individuals
who are known to be different (refer to discussions regarding concurrent and
predictive validity in Chapter 7). Convergent validity can be established when
there is a high degree of correlation between two different sources responding to
the same measure (e.g., both supervisors and subordinates respond similarly to
a perceived reward system measure administered to them). Discriminant
validity can be established when two distinctly different concepts are not
correlated to each other (for example, courage and honesty; leadership and
motivation; attitudes and behavior). Convergent and discriminant validity can be
established through the multitrait multimethod matrix, a full discussion of which
is beyond the scope of this book. The student interested in knowing more about
factor analysis and the multitrait multimethod matrix can refer to books on
those subjects. When well-validated measures are used, there is no need, of
course, to establish their validity again for each study. The reliability of the items
can, however, be tested.

Excelsior Enterprises descriptive statistics part 2

Once the new scores for perceived equity, job enrichment, burnout, and intention
to leave have been calculated, we are ready to further analyze the data.
Descriptive statistics such as maximum, minimum, means, standard deviations,
and variance can now be obtained for the multi-item, interval-scaled
independent and dependent variables. What's more, a correlation matrix can
also be obtained to examine how the variables in our model are related to each
other.

This will help us to answer questions like:

What are the employees perceptions on job enrichment?

How many employees have which degrees of burnout?

 Are the employees satisfied with their jobs?

Is there much variance in the extent to which employees perceive the

relationship with the company as
equitable?

What percentage of employees is inclined to leave the organization?

What are the relationships between perceived equity, burnout, job enrichment,
job satisfaction, and
intention to leave?

Descriptive statistics such as maximum, minimum, means, standard deviations,

and variance were obtained for the interval-scaled independent and dependent
variables in the Excelsior Enterprises study. The results are shown in Table 11.4.
It may be mentioned that all variables except ITL were tapped on a five-point
scale. ITL was measured on a four-point scale.

Table 11.4 Descriptive statistics for independent and dependent variables

From the results, it may be seen that the mean on perceived equity is rather low
(2.32 on a five-point scale), as is the mean on experienced burnout (2.55). Job
satisfaction is about average (3.22 on a five-point scale), and the job is
perceived as somewhat enriched (3.40). The mean of 2.21 on a four-point scale
for ITL indicates that most of the respondents are neither bent on leaving nor
staying. The minimum of 1 indicates that there are some who do not intend to
leave at all, and the maximum of 4 indicates that some are seriously considering
leaving. Table 11.5 provides a more detailed account of employees' intentions to
leave. This table shows that a large group of employees seriously considers
leaving Excelsior Enterprises! Testing our hypotheses will improve our
understanding of why employees consider leaving Excelsior Enterprises and will
provide us with useful tools to reduce employees' intentions to leave the
company.

Table 11.5 Frequency table intention to leave

In sum, the perceived equity is rather low, not much burnout is experienced, the
job is perceived to be fairly enriched, there is average job satisfaction, and there
is neither a strong intention to stay with the organization nor to leave it. The
variance for all the variables is rather high, indicating that participants answers
are not always very close to the mean on all the variables.

The Pearson correlation matrix obtained for the five interval-scaled variables is
shown in Table 11.6.

Table 11.6 Correlations between independent and dependent variables

From the results, we see that the intention to leave is, as would be expected,
significantly negatively correlated to job satisfaction, perceived equity, and job
enrichment. That is, the intention to leave is low if job satisfaction and equitable
treatment are experienced, and the job is enriched. However, when individuals
experience burnout (physical and emotional exhaustion), their intention to leave
also increases (positive correlation of 0.531). Job
satisfaction is also positively correlated to perceived equity, and an enriched job.
It is negatively correlated to burnout and ITL. The correlations are all in the
expected direction.

It is important to note that no correlation exceeded 0.55 for this sample. If

correlations between the dependent variables were higher (say, 0.75 and
above), we might have had a collinearity problem in our regression analysis.

After we have obtained descriptive statistics for the independent and dependent
variables in our study, we can test our hypotheses. Hypothesis testing is
discussed in the next chapter.

Summary

In this chapter we covered the initial steps of the procedure for analyzing data
once they are collected. Through the example of the research on Excelsior
Enterprises, we saw the steps necessary to get the data ready for analysis
editing, coding, and categorizing. We also obtained descriptive statistics for the
variables in the Excelsior Enterprises case. Finally we tested the goodness of
data using Cronbach's alpha.

Discussion Questions

1. What activities are involved in getting the data ready for analysis?
2. What does coding the data involve?
3. Data editing deals with detecting and correcting illogical, inconsistent, or
illegal data in the information returned by the participants of the study. Explain
the difference between illogical, inconsistent, and illegal data.
4. How would you deal with missing data?
5. What is reverse scoring and when is reverse scoring necessary?
6. There are three measures of central tendency: the mean, the median, and the
mode. Measures of dispersion include the range, the standard deviation, and the
variance (where the measure of central tendency is the mean), and the
interquartile range (where the measure of central tendency is the median).
Describe these measures and explain which of these measures you would use to
provide an overview of (a) nominal, (b) ordinal and (c) interval data?
7. A researcher wants to provide an overview of the gender of the respondents in
his sample. The gender is measured like this: What is your gender? Male
Female. What is the best way to provide an overview of the gender of the
respondents?
8. Consider the following reliability analysis for the variable customer
differentiation. What could you conclude from it?

Reliability Analysis-Scale (Alpha)

Exercise 11.1

The following data are available:

1. Data handling

a. Enter the data in SPSS. Save the file to your USB flashdrive. Name the file
resmethassignment1.

b. Provide appropriate variable labels, value labels, and scaling indications to the
variables.

2. Descriptives

a. Use Analyze, Descriptive statistics, Descriptives to summarize metric

variables.
b. Use Analyze, Descriptive statistics, Frequencies to summarize nonmetric
variables.

c. Create a pie-chart for Year in college.

d. Create a histogram for IQ and include the normal distribution.

e. Make a scatter plot with IQ on the x-axis and exam grade on the y-axis. What
do you conclude?
f. Recode the sex variable such that it is 1 for females and 0 for males.

g. Make a scatter plot with sex on the x-axis and IQ on the y-axis. What do you
conclude?

h. Compute the mean IQ for males and for females. Conclusion?

i. Create a new dummy variable, IQdum, which is 1 if the IQ is larger than or

equal to 100, and 0 otherwise.