The effect of context-specific versus nonspecific subconscious goals on employee performance

Gary P. Latham; Ronald F. Piccolo

doi:10.1002/hrm.21486

Validation of the Procrastination at Work Scale

European Journal of Psychological Assessment ◽

10.1027/1015-5759/a000554 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 36 (5) ◽

pp. 767-776

Author(s):

U. Baran Metin ◽

Toon W. Taris ◽

Maria C. W. Peeters ◽

Max Korpinen ◽

Urška Smrke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Work Engagement ◽

Discriminant Validity ◽

Psychometric Characteristics ◽

The Czech Republic ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Confirmatory Factor ◽

And Performance ◽

Context Specific ◽

Negative Links ◽

Office Employees

Abstract. Procrastination at work has been examined relatively scarcely, partly due to the lack of a globally validated and context-specific workplace procrastination scale. This study investigates the psychometric characteristics of the Procrastination at Work Scale (PAWS) among 1,028 office employees from seven countries, namely, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, Slovenia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. Specifically, it was aimed to test the measurement invariance of the PAWS and explore its discriminant validity by examining its relationships with work engagement and performance. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis shows that the basic factor structure and item loadings of the PAWS are invariant across countries. Furthermore, the two subdimensions of procrastination at work exhibited different patterns of relationships with work engagement and performance. Whereas soldiering was negatively related to work engagement and task performance, cyberslacking was unrelated to engagement and performance. These results indicate further validity evidence for the PAWS and the psychometric characteristics show invariance across various countries/languages. Moreover, workplace procrastination, especially soldiering, is a problematic behavior that shows negative links with work engagement and performance.

Download Full-text

Ambulatory Assessment

European Psychologist ◽

10.1027/1016-9040.14.2.109 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 14 (2) ◽

pp. 109-119 ◽

Cited By ~ 66

Author(s):

Ulrich W. Ebner-Priemer ◽

Timothy J. Trull

Keyword(s):

Real Time ◽

Clinical Psychology ◽

Real Life ◽

Ambulatory Assessment ◽

Computer Assisted ◽

Affective Valence ◽

Time Data ◽

Physiological Processes ◽

Context Specific ◽

Questionnaire Studies

Convergent experimental data, autobiographical studies, and investigations on daily life have all demonstrated that gathering information retrospectively is a highly dubious methodology. Retrospection is subject to multiple systematic distortions (i.e., affective valence effect, mood congruent memory effect, duration neglect; peak end rule) as it is based on (often biased) storage and recollection of memories of the original experience or the behavior that are of interest. The method of choice to circumvent these biases is the use of electronic diaries to collect self-reported symptoms, behaviors, or physiological processes in real time. Different terms have been used for this kind of methodology: ambulatory assessment, ecological momentary assessment, experience sampling method, and real-time data capture. Even though the terms differ, they have in common the use of computer-assisted methodology to assess self-reported symptoms, behaviors, or physiological processes, while the participant undergoes normal daily activities. In this review we discuss the main features and advantages of ambulatory assessment regarding clinical psychology and psychiatry: (a) the use of realtime assessment to circumvent biased recollection, (b) assessment in real life to enhance generalizability, (c) repeated assessment to investigate within person processes, (d) multimodal assessment, including psychological, physiological and behavioral data, (e) the opportunity to assess and investigate context-specific relationships, and (f) the possibility of giving feedback in real time. Using prototypic examples from the literature of clinical psychology and psychiatry, we demonstrate that ambulatory assessment can answer specific research questions better than laboratory or questionnaire studies.

Download Full-text