Essays 2018. From Questionnaire to Scale: Exhibition of research papers in the field of administration sciences as a basis for innovation
Keywords:
questionnaire, scale, management, innovationSynopsis
The present work, "From Questionnaire to Scale: Presentation of Research Papers in the Administration Sciences as a Basis for Innovation, 2018," aims to bring together a series of essays developed by students of the Doctorate in Administration Sciences (DCA) at the University Center for Economic and Administrative Sciences (CUCEA) of the University of Guadalajara (UdeG), based on what they learned in the Scale Creation subject.
These essays are primarily oriented towards conducting a dissertation exercise that reinforces either their thesis or serves as a contribution to the subject, emphasizing the relevance of their writing, conceptualizing, and proposing the models reviewed as part of their dissertation development. The above serves as a basis for conducting discussions that clarify the expected contribution, and finally, to conclude with essential points that serve both the reader and the presenter for further studies.
Thus, this work is divided into fifteen essays. The first essay, "Comparative Analysis of Software Tools for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)," provides a relevant contribution to the reader by conducting a comparative analysis of various SEM analysis techniques, particularly focusing on the capabilities of AMOS, EQS, and LISREL, and making a series of usage recommendations.
The second essay, "Decoding Consumer Behavior Through Mathematical Analysis," bases its importance on neoclassical conceptions explaining consumer behavior in terms of utility, microeconomic theories in consumer behavior research from various approaches (revealed preference, rational theory, and neuroeconomics), proposing a mathematical approach to evaluate consumer behavior.
The third work, "Discussion of Results Obtained in the Application of the Differentiation Matrix between Craftsmanship and Handicrafts (DAM) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA): Case of Craft Companies in Tonala, Jalisco," presents the fundamental bases of the research thesis of the presenter. The value of this work lies in proposing how to adapt DAM to discover, through CFA, the relationship of the new proposed variables that underlie the sector.
The fourth document, "Bibliometric Analysis of Open Data in the Last Ten Years: Temporal Perspectives towards Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) of the Open Data Policy of the Mexican Government," is essential for social sciences (economic-administrative), providing knowledge about Open Data and its impact on the development of public policies, such as portals and applications for accessing information, allowing citizens to make better decisions and thus strengthen innovation and entrepreneurship in countries.
The fifth essay, "MAAS and Langer Scales to Measure the Degree of Mindfulness and Its Influence in Organizations," is a notable effort in comparing two scales to measure business mindfulness. Its results aim to describe the advantages and disadvantages of use, allowing for the anticipation of an original model proposal that considers them for a thesis to be developed.
The sixth work, "From the Creation to the Adaptation of Scales to Measure the Experience and Motivations in Massive Events," is a very interesting work that attempts to contribute to previous scales of Event Experience Scale (EES) and Motivation-Opportunity-Ability (MOA). The author disserts on the variables that define them with the aim of laying the foundations for the development of her thesis.
The seventh document, "Comparative Measurement of Innovative Personality Traits: Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis," is the result of the author's efforts to compile previous scales that define innovative personality to make a final qualitative-quantitative methodology proposal defining the innovative subject, taking into account psychological and administrative factors.
The eighth essay, "Design of a Base Questionnaire to Create a Scale that Determines the Level of Social Capital in Organizations," is valuable in showing the most relevant aspects to consider in developing a questionnaire to determine the current situation of social capital in organizations, based on literature review, considering the most important factors it should include to determine the situation in the Mexican context.
The ninth work, "From Questionnaire to Scale: Model to Measure the Impact of Endomarketing," is of high value as it proposes a valid and reliable instrument to measure endomarketing and identify relationships with organizational factors such as attitudes, staff retention, staff conformity, relative competitive position, and customer satisfaction.
The tenth document, "Contrast of Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis Applied to Total Quality Management (TQM) as a Variable of Organizational Performance," offers an important contribution by compiling and analyzing the scope of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis applied to analyze the most recent TQM models to propose adjustments between them.
The eleventh essay, "Causal Models: A Knowledge View from Structural Equation Modeling," shows a significant effort by the author to analyze, from a more knowledge-oriented perspective, the effects that working with causal models has tested from the use of structural equations (SEM), helping to correctly ground the assessment given by the exogenous and endogenous variables that make up the proposed theoretical model, this in order to contribute to a change of paradigms from scientific research in administration, generating proper cohesion between constructs already tested and others of empirical analysis.
The twelfth work, "Basic Considerations of Design and Facet Analysis in the Qualitative Cut Questionnaire: A Guide for Questionnaire Design in Technology Transfer," is valuable in contrasting previous studies based on facet structure and the opportunity to create scales that facilitate technology transfer.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Barrett, P. (2007). Structural Equation Modelling: Adjudging Model Fit. Personality and Individual Differences. 42, (5), 815-824.
Batista, J. C. G. (2000). Modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Madrid: La Muralla.
Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 Structural Equations Program Manual. En- cino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.
Bentler, P. M., y Wu, E. J. C. (2002). EQS 6 for Windows User’s Guide. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Multivariate applications book series. Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, Estados Unidos:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS, EQS,
and LISREL: Comparative Approaches to Testing for the Factorial Validity of a Measuring Instrument. International Journal of Tes- ting, 1 (1), 55-86. doi.org/10.1207/S15327574IJT0101_4
Chin, W. (1998). Issues and opinion on Structural Equation Modeling. Estados Unidos: MIS Quarterly.
Cupani, M. (2012). Análisis de Ecuaciones Estructurales: conceptos, eta- pas de desarrollo y un ejemplo de aplicación. Revista tesis. 1 (1), 186- 199.
Diamantopoulos, A. y Siguaw, J.A. (2000). Introducing LISREL. London: Sage Publications.
Doral-Fábregas, F., Rodríguez-Ardura, I., y Meseguer-Artola, A. (2018). Models of structural equations in social science research: user expe- rience in Facebook. Revista de Ciencias Sociales. 24(1), 22-40.
Escobedo-Portillo, M. T., Hernández-Gómez, J. A., Estebané-Ortega, V., y Martínez-Moreno, G. (2016). Modelos de ecuaciones estructu- rales: Características, fases, construcción, aplicación y resultados. Ciencia y trabajo. 18 (55), 16-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718- 24492016000100004
Freedman, D. A. (1987). As Others See Us: A Case in Path Analysis with discussion. Journal of Educational Statistics. 12, (2), 101-128.
García Fernández, B., Mateos Jiménez, A., y Romo-Pérez, V. (2017). Construcción y validación de un instrumento para identificar las per- cepciones de los docentes de Ciencias sobre el modelo de enseñanza por competencias. Estudios Pedagógicos 43 (1), 139-156.
Guárdia-Olmos, J. (2016). Esquema y recomendaciones para el uso de los Modelos de Ecuaciones Estructurales. Revista de estudios e investiga- ción en psicología y educación, 3 (2), 75-80. https://doi.org/10.17979/ reipe.2016.3.2.1847
Hell, J. G., Oosterveld, P., y Groot, A. M. B. (1996). Covariance structure analysis in experimental research: Comparing two-word translation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28 (4), 491–503, https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200538
Hox, J. J. (1995). AMOS, EQS, and LISREL for Windows: A Comparative Review. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 2 (1), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519509539996
Hox, J. J., y Bechger, T. M. (2009). Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Jour- nal. 1 (11), 354- 373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903008345
Hoelter, J. W. (1983). The analysis of covariance structures: Goodness-of- fit indices. Sociological Methods & Research. 11 (3), 325-344.
Hu, L.T. y Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Cova- riance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alter- natives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6 (1), 1-55.
Jöreskog K., y Sörbom D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chi- cago: Scientific Software International.
Kahn, J.H. (2006). Factor analysis in Counseling Psychology re- search, training and practice. Principies, advances and applica- tions. The counseling psychologist. 34 (5), 684-718. https://doi. org/10.1177/0011000006286347
Kent (2018). Statistical and Qualitative Data Analysis Software: About SPSS and Amos. Kent State University. Recuperado de: https://libgui- des.library.kent.edu/statconsulting/SPSS
Kline (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
Lara-Hormigo, A. (2014). Introduccion a las Ecuaciones Estructurales en AMOS y R. Guia de Referencia.
Marcoulides, G.A. (1998). Modern Methods for Business Research. Esta- dos Unidos: Lawrence Eribaum.
MVSOFT (2013). Multivariate Software. EQS Version 6.1 - Structural Equation Modeling Software. Recuperado de: http://www.mvsoft. com/whyuseeqs.htm
Narayanan, A. (2012). A review of eight software packages for structural equation modeling. The American Statistician. 66 (2), 129-13, https:// doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2012.708641
Nebojsa, S. D., (2014). The use and misuse of structural equation mode- ling (SEM) in management research: A review and critique. Journal of Advances in Management Research. 17 (2), 195-202.
Novo, M., Seijo, D., y Arce, R. (2016). Diseño y validación de una escala para la evaluación del sentido de comunidad en grupos académicos virtuales. Revista de Investigación en Educación. 1 (1), 1-16.
Raykov, T., y Marcoulides, G.A (2006). A First Course in Structural Equa- tion Modeling. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rupp, A., Koh, K., y Zumbo, B. D. (2003). What is the impact on explo- ratory factor analysis results of a polychoric correlation matrix from LISREL/ PRELIS and EQS when some respondents are not able to follow the rating scale?. University of Calgary. 1-32.
Shah, R., y Meyer Goldstein, S. (2006). Use of structural equation mode- ling in operations management research: Looking back and forward. Journal of Operations Management, 24(2), 148–169. https://doi.or- g/10.1016/j.jom.2005.05.001
Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. y Kacmar, K. M. (2004). An as- sessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic ma- nagement research. Strategic Management Journal. 25,(4), 397-404
Sroufe, R. (2009). Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Environmental Management Practices and Operations. Pro- duction and Operations Management, 12 (3), 416-431. doi.or- g/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2003.tb00212.x
Steenkamp J, B. y Baumgartner H. (2000). On the use of structural equa- tion models for marketing modeling. International Journal of Re- search in Marketing, 17 (2), 195-202.
Tarka, P. (2018). An overview of structural equation modeling: its be- ginnings, historical development, usefulness and controversies in the social sciences. Quality & Quantity, 51 (1), 313–354. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11135-017-0469-8
Downloads
Published
December 30, 2019
Series
Categories
Copyright (c) 2019 Juan Mejía-Trejo
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Details about this monograph
ISBN-13 (15)
978-607-98782-4-5
doi
10.55965/abib.9786079878245.2019b
