Shorter maybe better: Psychometric properties of the UWES-3 items for measuring engagement in university Mexican teachers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19083/ridu.2023.1623Keywords:
Engagement, UWES, University teachers, Measurement ScalesAbstract
Introduction: Work engagement is a relevant positive psychological effect in the literature, and validity studies of the ultra-brief version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale are practically nonexistent in Latin America. Objective: to identify the psychometric properties of the ultra-brief version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-3) and to analyze its equivalence with the UWES-9 version in a sample of teachers from a public university in Mexico. Method: the final sample consisted of N=247 university teachers, who answered the 9-item and 3-item versions of the UWES and the Burnout Evaluation Questionnaire for Education Personnel (CESQT-PE) to estimate its discriminant validity. Results: The results confirmed very high correlations between both versions of the UWES (3-9) (r=>.82-.93), a unidimensional structure of the UWES- 3 with higher factor loadings (>.75), satisfactory internal consistency values (>.70) and high and similar correlations in the expected direction between both versions and the CESQT-PE (q=.02-.08). Conclusions: We conclude that there is equivalence of the UWES-3 and the UWES-9. The practical benefits of the ultra-brief version for the measurement of work engagement in university teachers are discussed.Downloads
References
Álvarez Garón, S. M., & Peña Fuentes, J. N. (2019). Adaptación del Utrecht Work Engagement Scale–UWES en profesores universitarios de Villavicencio (Tesis de pregrado) Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia, Villavicencio. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/12393
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council for Measurement in Education [AERA, APA & NCME] (2014). The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, D.C.: AERA
Auerswald, M., & Moshagen, M. (2019). How to determine the number of factors to retain in exploratory factor analysis: A comparison of extraction methods under realistic conditions. Psychological Methods, 24(4), 468–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000200
Burić, I., & Macuka, I. (2018). Self-efficacy, emotions and work engagement among teachers: A two wave cross-lagged analysis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19(7), 1917-1933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9903-9
Calderón-de la Cruz, G. A., Merino-Soto, C., Juárez-García, A., Dominguez-Lara, S., & Fernández-Arata, M. (2020). ¿Es replicable la estructura factorial del Maslach Burnout Inventory Human Service Survey (MBIHSS) en la profesión de enfermera del Perú?: un estudio nacional. Enfermería Clínica, 30(5), 340-348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2019.12.013
DeCarlo, L. T. (1997). On the meaning and use of kurtosis. Psychological Methods, 2(3), 292-307. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.2.3.292
Diedenhofen, B. & Musch, J. (2015). A Comprehensive Solution for the Statistical Comparison of Correlations. PLoSONE, 10(4), e0121945. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121945
Dominguez-Lara, S. A., Fernández-Arata, M., & Seperak-Viera, R. (2021). Análisis psicométrico de una medida ultra-breve para el engagement académico: UWES-3S: UWES-3S en estudiantes universitarios. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento, 13(1), 25-37.https://doi.org/10.32348/1852.4206.v13.n1.27780
Flores Jiménez, C., Fernández Arata, M., Juárez García, A., Merino Soto, C., & Guimet Castro, M. (2015). Entusiasmo por el trabajo (engagement): un estudio de validez en profesionales de la docencia en Lima, Perú. Liberabit, 21(2), 195-206. http://www.scielo.org.pe/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1729-48272015000200003
Gil-Monte, P. R. (2011). Evaluación del cuestionario CESQT. Madrid.
Gil-Monte, P. R., & Noyola, C. V. (2011). Estructura factorial del “Cuestionario para la Evaluación del Síndrome de Quemarse por el Trabajo” en maestros mexicanos de educación primaria. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 28(1), 75–84. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=243029630007
Gil-Monte, P. R., Unda, S. R., & Sandoval, O. J. I. (2009). Validez factorial del « Cuestionario para la Evaluación del Síndrome de Quemarse por el Trabajo » ( CESQT ) en una muestra de maestros mexicanos. Salud Mental, 32(3), 205–214. http://www.revistasaludmental.mx/index.php/salud_mental/article/view/1285
González-Romá, V., Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A. & Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 165-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.01.003
Gwet, K. L. (2008). Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agree ment. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61, 29-48. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006X126600
Gwet, K. L. (2019). irrCAC: Computing Chance-Corrected Agreement Coefficients (CAC). R package version 1.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=irrCAC
Han, J., Yin, H., Wang, J., & Zhang, J. (2020). Job demands and resources as antecedents of university teachers’ exhaustion, engagement and job satisfaction. Educational Psychology, 40(3), 318-335. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1674249
Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2020). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-3. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semTools
Juárez-García, A. (2015). Investigaciones psicométricas de escalas psicosociales en trabajadores mexicanos. México, DF: Plaza y Valdés.
Levy, P. (1967) The correction for spurious correlation in the evaluation of short-form tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 84-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(196701)23:1<84::aid-jclp2270230123>3.0.co;2-2
Loevinger, J. (1948). The technic of homogeneous testscompared with some aspects of scale analysis and factor analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 45(6), 507-529. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0055827
Mahalanobis, P. C. (1936). On the generalized distance in statistics. Proceedings of the National Institute of Science of India, 12(1), 49-55. http://hdl.handle.net/10263/6765
Makowski, (2018). The psycho Package: an efficient and publishing-oriented workflow for psychological science. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(22), 470. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.0047
Mangiafico, S. (2021). rcompanion: Functions to support extension education program evaluation. R package version 2.4.1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rcompanion
Martins, E. L. D. S., & Mendonça, H. (2019). Evidencias de validez de la escala de compromiso de docentes de educación básica. Psicologia em Pesquisa, 13(3), 159-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.34019/1982-1247.2019.v13.27110
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). The truth about burnout. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., Leiter, M.P., Schaufeli, W.B. and Schwab, R.L. (1986) Maslach burnout inventory instruments and scoring guides forms: General, human services, & educators. Health and Quality of life Outcomes, 7, 31. http://www.mindgarden.com
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085
Merino-Soto, C., & Angulo-Ramos, M. (2013). Validación en Chile de la escala de sobrecarga del cuidador de Zarit en sus versiones original y abreviada: corrección. Revista Médica de Chile, 141, 1083-1084. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0034-98872013000800019
Mokken, R. J. (1971) A Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
Molenaar, I. W., & Sijtsma, K. (1984). Internal consistency and reliability in Mokken’s nonparametric item response
model. Tijdschrift voor onderwijsresearch, 9, 257–268.
Molenaar, I. W., & Sijtsma, K. (1988). Mokken’s approach to reliability estimation extended to multicategory items. Kwantitatieve methoden, 9(28), 115-126. https://research.tilburguniversity.edu/en/publications/mokkens-approach-to-reliability-estimation-
extended-to-multicateg
Revelle, W. (2020) psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois. R package version 2.0.12. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/.
Ruscio, J. (2018). RGenData: Generates Multivariate Nonnormal Data and Determines How Many Factors to Retain.
R package version 1.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RGenData
Ruscio, J., & Roche, B. (2012). Determining the number of factors to retain in an exploratory factor analysis using comparison data of known factorial structure. Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 282–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025697
Salanova, M., & Schaufeli, W. (2009). El engagement en el trabajo: cuando el trabajo se convierte en pasión. Alianza Editorial; Madrid.
Salanova, M., Schaufeli, W.B., Llorens, S., Peiro, J.M. & Grau, R. (2000). Desde el ‘burnout’ al ‘engagement’: ¿ Una nueva perspectiva? [From ‘burnout’ to ‘engagement’: A new perspective?] Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y las Organizaciones, 16, 117-134. https://journals.copmadrid.org/jwop/art/7c590f-01490190db0ed02a5070e20f01
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp.10-24). New York: Psychology Press
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701-716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness studies, 3(1), 71-92.
Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & De Witte, H. (2019). An ultra-short measure for work engagement: The UWES-3 validation across five countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 577–591. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000430
Schaufeli, W.B. (2017). General engagement: Its conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Well-Being Assessment, 1, 9-24.
Schaufeli, W.B. (2018). Burnout in Europe: Relations with national economy, governance, and culture. Research Unit Occupational & Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning (internal report). KU Leuven: Belgium.
Sijtsma, K., & Van der Ark, L. A. (2017). A tutorial on how to do a Mokken scale analysis on your test and questionnaire data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 70(1), 137-158. https://doi. org/10.1111/bmsp.12078
Smith, G. T., McCarthy, D. M., & Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.102
Steiger, J. H. (1980). Testing pattern hypotheses on correlation matrices: alternative statistics and some empirical results. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 15, 335-352. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1503_7
Straat J. H., Van der Ark L. A., Sijtsma K. (2016). Using conditional association to identify locally independent item sets. Methodology 12 117–123. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000115
Straat, J. H., Van der Ark, L. A., & Sijtsma, K. (2013). Comparing optimization algorithms for item selection in Mokken scale analysis. Journal of Classification, 30, 72-99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-013-9122-y
Straat, J. H., Van der Ark, L. A., and Sijtsma, K. (2013). Comparing optimization algorithms for item selection in Mokken scale analysis. Journal of Classification, 30, 72-99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-013-9122-y
Van Abswoude, A.A.H., Van der Ark, L.A., & Sijtsma, K. (2004). A comparative study of test dimensionality assessment procedures under nonparametric IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 3–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146621603259277
Van der Ark, L. A. (2012). New developments in Mokken Scale Analysis in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(5), 1-27. http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i05/
Van Schuur, W.H. (2003). Mokken Scale Analysis: between the Guttman scale and parametric item response theory. Political Analysis, 11, 139-163. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpg002
Wetzel, E., Böhnke, J. R., & Brown, A. (2016). Response biases. In F. T. L. Leong, D. Bartram, F. M. Cheung, K. F. Geisinger, & D. Iliescu (Eds.), The ITC international handbook of testing and assessment (p. 349–363). Oxford University Press.
Wind, S.A. (2017). An Instructional Module on Mokken Scale Analysis. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 36: 50-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12153
World Medical Asociation (AMM). (2013). Declaración de Helsinki de la AMM - Principios éticos para las investigaciones médicas en seres humanos. World Medical Association, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053
Wyatt, M., & Dikilitaş, K. (2016). English language teachers becoming more efficacious through research engagement at their Turkish university. Educational Action Research, 24(4), 550-570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1076731
Zhu, N. Q. (2001). The effects of teachers’ flow experiences on the cognitive engagement of students. (Tesis Doctoral). Universidad de San Diego.
Zou, G. Y. (2007). Toward using confidence intervals to compare correlations. Psychological Methods, 12, 399- 413. http://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.4.399
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Arturo Juárez García, César Merino-Soto, Daniela Villamar Sánchez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
