中国临床心理学杂志

中文版员工真实性量表的信效度检验

作者：刘兴云¹ 2 王詠¹

单位：1. 中国科学院心理研究所心理健康重点实验室北京 100101
2. 中国科学院大学北京 100049

分类号：R395.1

出版年,卷(期):页码：2016,24(3):454-458

摘要：

目的：检验员工真实性量表（Individual authenticity measure at work，IAM Work）在中国企业员工中应用的信度和效度。方法：用IAM Work中文版对657名企业员工进行测试，在样本中随机抽取214名员工同时施测IAM Work中文版、Utrecht工作投入量表简版（UWES-9）、建言行为量表和中国企业员工工作幸福感量表，并在两个月后重测。结果：验证性因素分析验证了员工真实性的三因素模型。各拟合指标分别为χ²/df=2.61，NFI=0.94，CFI=0.96，IFI=0.96，GFI=0.93，AGFI=0.91，RMSEA=0.05。简版量表为χ²/df=2.99，NFI=0.97，CFI=0.98，IFI=0.98，GFI=0.96，AG-FI=0.94，RMSEA=0.06。所有项目的决断值均显著（P<0.001），项目与量表总分的相关在0.46~0.77之间。IAM Work中文版量表和真实的生活、自我异化、接受外部影响的Cronbach's α系数依次为0.92、0.90、0.93、0.91。简版量表的Cronbach's α系数依次为0.89、0.83、0.92、0.92。IAM Work量表两个月后的重测信度为0.79，简版为0.78。IAM Work中文版总分、简版总分与工作幸福感（r=0.67，0.58，P<0.01）、工作投入（r=0.50，0.43，P<0.01）与建言行为（r=0.34，0.23，P<0.01）呈现显著正相关。结论：IAM Work中文版量表和简版量表具有良好的信效度，适合在中国背景下使用。

Objective: To test the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Individual Authenticity Measure at Work (IAM Work).Methods: The reliability and validity of the IAM Work was tested using a sample size of 657 employees.To evaluate the validity of the IAM Work,214 employees were randomly selected to test with the IAM Work,UWES-9,Voice Behavior Scale,and the Employee Occupational Well-being in Chinese Enterprises Scale.These employees were retested two months later.Results: Confirmatory factor analysis supported the three-factor structure model.The fitted indices are χ²/df=2.61,NFI=0.94,CFI=0.96,IFI=0.96,GFI=0.93,AGFI=0.91,RMSEA=0.05,and the fitted indices for the short version are χ²/df=2.99,NFI=0.97,CFI=0.98,IFI=0.98,GFI=0.96,AGFI=0.94,RMSEA=0.06.The critical ratios of all the items were statistically significant (P<0.001),and the correlations between each item and the total score ranged from 0.46 to 0.77.The Cronbach's α coefficients of the total scale,authentic living,self-alienation,and accepting external influence subscale were 0.92,0.90,0.93 and 0.91 respectively.The Cronbach's α coefficients for the short version are 0.89,0.83,0.92 and 0.92 respectively.The test-retest reliability after 2 months is 0.79 for the full scale and 0.78 for the short version.The total scores of both the Chinese version of IAM Work and the short version showed significant positive correlations with occupational well-being (r=0.67,0.58,P<0.01),work engagement (r=0.50,0.43,P<0.01),and the Voice Behavior Scale total score (r=0.34,0.23,P<0.01).Conclusion: Both Chinese version of IAM Work and the short version are reliable,valid,and suitable for measuring the authenticity of Chinese employees.

基金项目：

中科院心理所创新项目“国民幸福感指数的建构与影响因素识别”（Y1CX193007）

作者简介：

参考文献：

1 Kernis MH. Toward a conceptualization of optimal selfesteem. Psychological Inquiry, 2003, 14(1):1-26
2 Seligman ME, Csikszentmihalyi M. Positive psychology:An introduction. American Psychologist, 2000, 55(1):5-14
3 van den Bosch R, Taris TW. Authenticity at work:Development and validation of an individual authenticity measure at work. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2014, 15(1):1-18
4 van den Bosch R, Taris TW. The authentic worker's wellbeing and performance:The relationship between authenticity at work, well-being, and work outcomes. Journal of Psychology, 2014, 148(6):659-681
5 Knoll M, van Dick R. Authenticity, employee silence, prohibitive voice, and the moderating effect of organizational identification. Journal of Positive Psychology, 2013, 8(4):346-360
6 Kernis MH, Goldman BM. A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity:Theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2006, 38:283-357
7 Wood AM, Linley PA, Maltby J, et al. The authentic personality:A theoretical and empirical conceptualization and the development of the authenticity scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2008, 55(3):385-399
8 Lopez FG, Rice KG. Preliminary development and validation of a measure of relationship authenticity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2006, 53(3):362-371
9 Walumbwa FO, Avolio BJ, Gardner WL, et al., Authentic leadership:Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 2008, 34(1):89-126
10 王震,宋萌,孙健敏,真实型领导:概念、测量、形成与作用. 心理科学进展,2014,22(3):458-473
11 张珊珊,张建新. 领导-团队投入匹配对团队绩效的影响:团队满意度氛围的作用. 心理科学,2014,37(1):140-145
12 段锦云,凌斌. 中国背景下员工建言行为结构及中庸思维对其的影响. 心理学报,2011,43(10):1185-1197
13 黄亮. 中国企业员工工作幸福感的维度结构研究. 中央财经大学学报,2014,10:84-112
14 Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall, 2010
15 Pavlou PA, Liang HG, Xue YJ. Understanding and mitigatinguncertainty in online exchange relationships:A principalagent perspective. MIS Quarterly, 2007, 31(1):105-136
16 Suh EM. Culture, identity consistency, and subjective wellbeing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002, 83 (6):1378-1391
17 English T, Chen S. Culture and self-concept stability:Consistency across and within contexts among Asian Americans and European Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007, 93(3):478-490
18 Robinson OC, Lopez FG, Ramos K, et al. Authenticity, social context, and well-being in the United States, England, and Russia:A three country comparative analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2013, 44(5):719-737
19 Church AT, Katigbak MS, Ibanez-Reyes J, et al. Relating self-concept consistency to hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing in eight cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2014, 45(5):695-712

服务与反馈：

【文章下载】【加入收藏】