Comparing Single-Item and Multi-Item Trust Scales: Insights for Assessing Trust in Project Leaders.

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Behavioral Sciences Pub Date : 2023-09-21 DOI:10.3390/bs13090786
Marcela Souto Castro, Bouchaib Bahli, João J Ferreira, Ronnie Figueiredo
{"title":"Comparing Single-Item and Multi-Item Trust Scales: Insights for Assessing Trust in Project Leaders.","authors":"Marcela Souto Castro, Bouchaib Bahli, João J Ferreira, Ronnie Figueiredo","doi":"10.3390/bs13090786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this research is to provide researchers and leaders with a reliable and up-to-date comparison between a single-item and a multi-item trust scale, enabling effective assessment of team members' trust in their leaders. The aim of the study is to investigate whether a single-question scale is as reliable as a multi-item questionnaire in measuring trust. An additional goal is to provide researchers with insights and conditions for effectively using single or multiple measures to assess trust in leaders, considering factors like reliability and effectiveness. After conducting a comprehensive literature review, data were collected from 101 project members in Brazil using a survey methodology. The respondents were asked to provide feedback regarding their leaders, specifically project managers, and factor analysis was then employed to test the single-item and multi-item measures of trust. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are discussed. The findings of our study demonstrate that both single-item and multi-item scales of trust should be utilized to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the trust construct. Single-item questionnaires can reduce survey length, improve respondent friendliness, and increase participant willingness. On the other hand, multi-item questionnaires enable researchers to analyze latent variables that contribute to an overall variable, but they cannot isolate data for each of those constructs. The results show that both measures are reliable, providing researchers and professionals with insights into the benefits and drawbacks associated with each method. Consequently, this research equips researchers and project professionals with valuable information for selecting the appropriate measurement tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":8742,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences","volume":"13 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10525642/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13090786","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to provide researchers and leaders with a reliable and up-to-date comparison between a single-item and a multi-item trust scale, enabling effective assessment of team members' trust in their leaders. The aim of the study is to investigate whether a single-question scale is as reliable as a multi-item questionnaire in measuring trust. An additional goal is to provide researchers with insights and conditions for effectively using single or multiple measures to assess trust in leaders, considering factors like reliability and effectiveness. After conducting a comprehensive literature review, data were collected from 101 project members in Brazil using a survey methodology. The respondents were asked to provide feedback regarding their leaders, specifically project managers, and factor analysis was then employed to test the single-item and multi-item measures of trust. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are discussed. The findings of our study demonstrate that both single-item and multi-item scales of trust should be utilized to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the trust construct. Single-item questionnaires can reduce survey length, improve respondent friendliness, and increase participant willingness. On the other hand, multi-item questionnaires enable researchers to analyze latent variables that contribute to an overall variable, but they cannot isolate data for each of those constructs. The results show that both measures are reliable, providing researchers and professionals with insights into the benefits and drawbacks associated with each method. Consequently, this research equips researchers and project professionals with valuable information for selecting the appropriate measurement tool.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较单项和多项信任量表:评估项目领导者信任的见解。
本研究的目的是为研究人员和领导者提供单项目和多项目信任量表之间的可靠和最新比较,从而能够有效评估团队成员对其领导者的信任。本研究的目的是调查单问题量表在衡量信任方面是否与多项目问卷一样可靠。另一个目标是为研究人员提供见解和条件,以便有效地使用单一或多种衡量标准来评估对领导者的信任,同时考虑可靠性和有效性等因素。在进行了全面的文献综述后,使用调查方法从巴西的101个项目成员那里收集了数据。受访者被要求提供关于他们的领导者,特别是项目经理的反馈,然后采用因素分析来测试单项和多项信任指标。讨论了每种方法的优缺点。我们的研究结果表明,应利用单项和多项信任量表来更全面地理解信任结构。单项问卷可以缩短调查时间,提高受访者的友好性,并提高参与者的意愿。另一方面,多项目问卷使研究人员能够分析对整体变量有贡献的潜在变量,但他们无法分离出每个结构的数据。结果表明,这两种方法都是可靠的,为研究人员和专业人员提供了对每种方法的利弊的见解。因此,这项研究为研究人员和项目专业人员提供了选择适当测量工具的宝贵信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Behavioral Sciences
Behavioral Sciences Social Sciences-Development
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
429
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Study on Customer Behavior in Online Dating Platforms: Analyzing the Impact of Perceived Value on Enhancing Customer Loyalty. The Effect of Job Skill Demands Under Artificial Intelligence Embeddedness on Employees' Job Performance: A Moderated Double-Edged Sword Model. Exploring the Determinants of Chinese Tourists' Shopping Behavior During Shopping Tourism in Korea. Luxury or Cultural Tourism Activities? The Role of Narcissistic Personality Traits and Travel-Related Motivations. Family Functioning and Cohesion Scale: Validation of a Short Instrument for the Assessment of Intrafamily Relations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1