2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/165984
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Measuring a group construct: Collective efficacy and group measurement methods
Author(s):
Montgomery, Kathryn
Author Details:
Kathryn Montgomery, University of Maryland-Baltimore School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, email: kmontgom@son.umaryland.edu
Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of a measure of collective efficacy and to identify conceptual and methodological issues associated with the study of groups. Self efficacy theory (Bandura, 1986) served as the foundation for the development of the collective measure therefore both self and collective efficacy psychometric properties were examined. Collective representativeness (Durkheim, 1954) was utilized to provide the theoretical explanation for the distinction between the individual and group construct. This study was conducted in the natural organizational settings of 6 hospitals and academic medical centers in the Mid-Atlantic area. Organizationally established professional health care teams who had been given an organizationally assigned task were identified to participate in this study. Group members were asked to complete measures of self- efficacy and collective efficacy. In this study, the unit of measurement was the individual group member; the unit of analysis was the individual for self efficacy and the group was the unit of analysis for collective efficacy. The self-efficacy measure asked the individual to respond to the items using their individual contribution to the group's assignment as a reference point. For the collective efficacy measure, the individual group member was asked to respond to the items utilizing the group, and specifically the group's assignment, as a reference point in responding to the items. The group leader was asked to complete two different measures, one evaluating each individual member's performance in the group and the other questionnaire evaluating the group performance. The criteria for representativeness of a group concept and appropriateness for aggregation were based on a composition model (Rousseau, 1985) and aggregation guidelines (Verran, Gerber, & Milton, 1995). The criteria for representativeness and aggregation was met by 45 groups. The mean size of the group was 12. In 42.2% of the groups, the composition was a mix of disciplines from the health professions. All R.N. groups comprised 72.5%. To assess the stability of the group members not only within the organization but within the group, 74.3% had been in their organization greater than 5 years and 45.2% had had greater than 10 meetings, 46.5% had between 76 and 100% of the original members. The results of psychometric testing provided evidence of internal consistency reliability for both self efficacy (alpha = .85, n = 421) and collective efficacy scales (alpha = .90, n = 45). A correlation between the self efficacy of a group and the level of collective efficacy of each group (r = .29, p = .057) demonstrated that two distinct constructs were measured which provided initial evidence for validity. This research advances nursing science by offering a measure of collective efficacy and methods for studying groups. Such efforts are critical as health care organizations increasingly use teams and groups to conduct their work.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Host:
Southern Nursing Research Society
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleMeasuring a group construct: Collective efficacy and group measurement methodsen_GB
dc.contributor.authorMontgomery, Kathrynen_US
dc.author.detailsKathryn Montgomery, University of Maryland-Baltimore School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, email: kmontgom@son.umaryland.eduen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/165984-
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of a measure of collective efficacy and to identify conceptual and methodological issues associated with the study of groups. Self efficacy theory (Bandura, 1986) served as the foundation for the development of the collective measure therefore both self and collective efficacy psychometric properties were examined. Collective representativeness (Durkheim, 1954) was utilized to provide the theoretical explanation for the distinction between the individual and group construct. This study was conducted in the natural organizational settings of 6 hospitals and academic medical centers in the Mid-Atlantic area. Organizationally established professional health care teams who had been given an organizationally assigned task were identified to participate in this study. Group members were asked to complete measures of self- efficacy and collective efficacy. In this study, the unit of measurement was the individual group member; the unit of analysis was the individual for self efficacy and the group was the unit of analysis for collective efficacy. The self-efficacy measure asked the individual to respond to the items using their individual contribution to the group's assignment as a reference point. For the collective efficacy measure, the individual group member was asked to respond to the items utilizing the group, and specifically the group's assignment, as a reference point in responding to the items. The group leader was asked to complete two different measures, one evaluating each individual member's performance in the group and the other questionnaire evaluating the group performance. The criteria for representativeness of a group concept and appropriateness for aggregation were based on a composition model (Rousseau, 1985) and aggregation guidelines (Verran, Gerber, & Milton, 1995). The criteria for representativeness and aggregation was met by 45 groups. The mean size of the group was 12. In 42.2% of the groups, the composition was a mix of disciplines from the health professions. All R.N. groups comprised 72.5%. To assess the stability of the group members not only within the organization but within the group, 74.3% had been in their organization greater than 5 years and 45.2% had had greater than 10 meetings, 46.5% had between 76 and 100% of the original members. The results of psychometric testing provided evidence of internal consistency reliability for both self efficacy (alpha = .85, n = 421) and collective efficacy scales (alpha = .90, n = 45). A correlation between the self efficacy of a group and the level of collective efficacy of each group (r = .29, p = .057) demonstrated that two distinct constructs were measured which provided initial evidence for validity. This research advances nursing science by offering a measure of collective efficacy and methods for studying groups. Such efforts are critical as health care organizations increasingly use teams and groups to conduct their work.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T14:37:50Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T14:37:50Z-
dc.conference.hostSouthern Nursing Research Societyen_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.