Marcelline R. Fusilier, Daniel C. Ganster, R.Dennis Middlemist
{"title":"在选择情境下,期望理论模型形式的一种人内测试","authors":"Marcelline R. Fusilier, Daniel C. Ganster, R.Dennis Middlemist","doi":"10.1016/0030-5073(84)90042-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The predictive efficacy of various forms of the expectancy theory model is compared with respect to a behavioral criterion of task choice. The models tested take the form of (a) a multiplicative combination of the expectancy theory model's components (instrumentality × valence), (b) an additive combination of the components (instrumentality + valence), and (c) each component (instrumentality, valence) used individually to predict the criterion. The present investigation seeks to rectify various methodological problems inherent in past comparative studies. Specifically, two studies, each employing a different experimental method, are used to compare the predictive ability of the model forms. Results suggest that the multiplicative model is the most useful predictor of the behavioral criterion.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":76928,"journal":{"name":"Organizational behavior and human performance","volume":"34 3","pages":"Pages 323-342"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1984-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90042-4","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A within-person test of the form of the expectancy theory model in a choice context\",\"authors\":\"Marcelline R. Fusilier, Daniel C. Ganster, R.Dennis Middlemist\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0030-5073(84)90042-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The predictive efficacy of various forms of the expectancy theory model is compared with respect to a behavioral criterion of task choice. The models tested take the form of (a) a multiplicative combination of the expectancy theory model's components (instrumentality × valence), (b) an additive combination of the components (instrumentality + valence), and (c) each component (instrumentality, valence) used individually to predict the criterion. The present investigation seeks to rectify various methodological problems inherent in past comparative studies. Specifically, two studies, each employing a different experimental method, are used to compare the predictive ability of the model forms. Results suggest that the multiplicative model is the most useful predictor of the behavioral criterion.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational behavior and human performance\",\"volume\":\"34 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 323-342\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1984-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90042-4\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational behavior and human performance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0030507384900424\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational behavior and human performance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0030507384900424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A within-person test of the form of the expectancy theory model in a choice context
The predictive efficacy of various forms of the expectancy theory model is compared with respect to a behavioral criterion of task choice. The models tested take the form of (a) a multiplicative combination of the expectancy theory model's components (instrumentality × valence), (b) an additive combination of the components (instrumentality + valence), and (c) each component (instrumentality, valence) used individually to predict the criterion. The present investigation seeks to rectify various methodological problems inherent in past comparative studies. Specifically, two studies, each employing a different experimental method, are used to compare the predictive ability of the model forms. Results suggest that the multiplicative model is the most useful predictor of the behavioral criterion.