Application - Methods Section - Statistics Project Example

Application: Methods Section-Part 2 s: Affiliation: Application: Methods Section Part 2 Variables that predict job attitudes There are several factors or variables that tend to predict negative attitudes towards work. Some of these variables are feeling unappreciated, lack of accountability and engrained culture also referred to as old culture. These factors characterize a typical work setting and can affect the efficiency and productivity of work if not addressed in due course. Justification of Variables Feeling Unappreciated When workers feel unappreciated through underpayment by the management, they tend to develop a negative perspective of the company leading to revolt. This revolt reflects employee performance. The staff feels unappreciated when they put in an extra effort that is not recognized and upheld. Workers in this case tend to divert their concentration from the work setting and focus on other factors. The main way for the management to handle this issue is by showing gratitude to the workers for the work done. Appreciation can be shown in ways like improving workers environment and salary upgrade (Wengrzyn, 2012). Lack of Accountability Accountability is an aspect that demonstrates employee devotion to work. It drives an employee to go beyond normal means to achieve company goals and set structures. Relationships in a work setting are held together by truthful and honest communications. There should be honesty between the management and the employees. The discussion should involve all aspects of activities affecting work progress and both the employees and management should brainstorm and come up with ideas that enforce good working conditions. This approach ensures that all employees opinion count irrespective of position. It has no place for monopolization hence promoting accountability and transparency (Spicer, 2011). Ingrained culture Culture of a company should go hand in hand with market and economical advancement. The business should be flexible and embrace demanding issues effectively in regards to employee factors. The morale of employees is highly affected by the company`s culture. Culture also has the tendency to affect the company`s decisions, downfalls, victories and ways of communications. Cultural change in a business is a difficult but necessary aspect to change. Senior staffs who have been working for a corporation for many years may have difficulty in adapting to changes needed. These changes should incorporate the introduction of benefits to workers contract that will help boost employee’s morale. Promotion of hardworking and long term serving workers should also be considered and implemented to encourage employee loyalty (Spicer, 2011). Instruments Measuring Variables The conventional instruments to consider in measuring the selected variables are questionnaires, survey and caring out of interviews. Collective data analysis and translating have always involved the use of this means as a way to manage and tackle all issues of concern effectively. Questionnaires A Questionnaire is a data collection tool with the ability to elicit all kinds of emotions and attitude of the sampled individuals. It may be either structured or unstructured depending on the type of questions considered by the researcher. It is usually planned concisely with issues that tackle a certain field of study to acquire specific research points needed for analysis. After the point of an address is written then, the questionnaires are given to respondents to fill (AGED 5983, 2002). Survey Survey analysis is a research involving the use of sample collection of data. Sample data collection tends to give the researcher differentiated opinions on the ground. These opinions may be related or not related depending on the correspondents. It associates estimation of definitive characteristics through statistical methodology (OECD, 2001). Interview Interview form of data collection involves face to face communication between the researcher and the respondent in an attempt to receive first-hand reliable information. In this method, the roles of the parties involved changes as the process proceed (AGED 5983, 2002). Justification of the chosen instruments Questionnaires Questionnaires are widely used and are preferred because they are cheap in implementation. They also incorporate less time in accessing the required information. They also involve uniformity since each respondent receives same structured and formatted questions that are easy for comparison. Questionnaires promote standardization of collected data especially when the answers regulate through multiple choices (AGED 5983, 2002). Survey This method of research is suitable for general analysis of data collection methods. It allows the researcher to have a general idea of how the majority of people in the study group feel about the particular study case. Survey analysis is accurate as individuals under study do not interact so as to manipulate the results. Interview Interviews allow for clarity between researcher and correspondent that fosters good understanding. It`s simple nature makes it suitable for small children and the illiterate in the society (AGED 5983, 2002).Furthermore, for the respondent, it allows free feedback without restrictions whatsoever. This method is also conclusive as it enables the researcher to read the respondents body language that may be useful in data analysis (AGED 5983, 2002). Psychometric properties of the Instruments These properties tend to prove the capability and efficiency of the tools used in the study whether they are reliable, valid or both reliable and valid. Questionnaires When it comes to inquiries, the psychometric properties are both reliable and valid. The study findings will be consistent when it comes to reliability as long as aspects involving the topic of study do not change. Questionnaires have structured questions that guide the respondents in concentrating on the topic of study. These answers are well founded specifically to the study at as long as situations do not change. In regards to validity on the target study of analysis, the questions are structured to cover the subject base and hence the answers from recipients are bound within the circle of research (Leimkuehler, 2005). Survey In survey analysis, the psychometric properties associated can be classified as both reliable and valid. If the topic of the study does not change and the target recipients views and opinions do not change then the survey will be reliable at all times. Reliability factor is created by the fact that all analysis for the study is consistent with the topic. Its validity in this study is applicable as this instrument collects collective data and comes up with a conclusion that matches the majority view. The findings are used for improvement and modification purposes in the case Interview Interviews have a way of maintaining both the reliability and validity of the subject under study. Interviews are first hand response to questions surrounding the study. Responses in this case are sincere and truthful. The question of validity is addressed as the interviews are founded on the basis of the study since all questions are tailored to meet the study analysis. This method of data analysis will prove its psychometric ability once all factors are constant (Leimkuehler, 2005). Application: Results Section Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. 155 1 7 3.35 1.574 JS2: In general, I like my job. 155 1 7 3.78 1.645 JS3: In general, I like working at this company 155 1 7 3.59 1.627 Valid N (listwise) 155 Table 1 According to table 1 above, the number of participants that took part in the survey is 155 for all the job satisfaction variables. With reference to the mean, it is observed that generally, people who like their job make up a bigger portion than those that are satisfied with their jobs as well as those who like working at the current company their work for based on a mean score of 3.78 for participants that like their jobs. Case Processing Summary Cases Included Excluded Total N Percent N Percent N Percent JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. * JS3: In general, I like working at this company 155 100.0% 0 0.0% 155 100.0% Table 2 Report JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. JS3: In general, I like working at this company Mean N Std. Deviation 1 1.35 17 .493 2 2.00 28 .471 3 2.77 30 .728 4 3.58 36 .937 5 4.53 19 .697 6 5.48 21 .750 7 7.00 4 .000 Total 3.35 155 1.574 Table 3 When considering the reliability and validity of how participants who like working at the company relate to those satisfied with their work shows that employees coded 7 have the highest validity and reliability based on a mean score of 7.00. Report JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. JS2: In general, I like my job. Mean N Std. Deviation 1 1.29 14 .469 2 2.04 25 .676 3 2.54 26 .761 4 3.41 44 .972 5 4.57 14 .756 6 5.04 26 .958 7 6.67 6 .516 Total 3.35 155 1.574 Table 4 When considering the reliability and validity of how participants who like their companies relate to those satisfied with their work shows that employees coded 7 have the highest validity and reliability based on a mean score of 6.67. Case Processing Summary Cases Included Excluded Total N Percent N Percent N Percent JS2: In general, I like my job. * JS3: In general, I like working at this company 155 100.0% 0 0.0% 155 100.0% Table 5 Table 6 Descriptive Statistics Mean Std. Deviation N JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. 3.35 1.574 155 JS2: In general, I like my job. 3.78 1.645 155 JS3: In general, I like working at this company 3.59 1.627 155 Table 7 Correlations JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. JS2: In general, I like my job. JS3: In general, I like working at this company JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. Pearson Correlation 1 .848 .889 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 N 155 155 155 JS2: In general, I like my job. Pearson Correlation .848 1 .861 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 N 155 155 155 JS3: In general, I like working at this company Pearson Correlation .889 .861 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 N 155 155 155 Table 8 According to table 7 and 8 above, the number of participants that took the survey are 155 in all categories while JS1 and JS2 confirm reliability and validity through as they have a significant level of 0.000 which is below the alpha of 0.05 which indicates significance. Correlations JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. JS2: In general, I like my job. JS3: In general, I like working at this company Pearson Correlation JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. 1.000 .848 .889 JS2: In general, I like my job. .848 1.000 .861 JS3: In general, I like working at this company .889 .861 1.000 Sig. (1-tailed) JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. . .000 .000 JS2: In general, I like my job. .000 . .000 JS3: In general, I like working at this company .000 .000 . N JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. 155 155 155 JS2: In general, I like my job. 155 155 155 JS3: In general, I like working at this company 155 155 155 Table 9 Table 9 above shows that the correlations among variables validate the relationship between JS1 and JS2, JS2 and JS3, and JS1 & JS3 are all valid and reliable within the model. These shows that there is validity and reliability among the variables. Variables Entered/Removeda Model Variables Entered Variables Removed Method 1 JS3: In general, I like working at this company, JS2: In general, I like my job.b . Enter a. Dependent Variable: JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. b. All requested variables entered. Table 10 Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 .904a .817 .815 .678 a. Predictors: (Constant), JS3: In general, I like working at this company, JS2: In general, I like my job. Table 11 With reference to the R-squared value of 0.817, it is observed that the reliability of the model between job satisfaction and working for the company as well as liking for the job are valid within the model. The result also confirms job reliability showing that the model has a correlation between the variables tested. Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. 95.0% Confidence Interval for B B Std. Error Beta Lower Bound Upper Bound 1 (Constant) .069 .139 .495 .621 -.206 .343 JS2: In general, I like my job. .304 .065 .317 4.646 .000 .175 .433 JS3: In general, I like working at this company .596 .066 .616 9.015 .000 .465 .727 a. Dependent Variable: JS1: All in all, I am satisfied with my job. Table 12 Table 12 above shows a regression output which confirms the alpha values for the models. While correlations and means show that the relationship between JS1 and JS2, JS2 and JS3, and JS1 and JS3 are closely related, the regression shows significance level testing validity and reliability of the instrument results for the model. References AGED 5983. (2002). Data Tools. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from AGED 5983 website: http://www.okstate.edu/ag/agedcm4h/academic/aged5980a/5980newpage16.htm Leimkuehler, P. E. (2005). Section II: Psychometric Properties of Outcome Measures. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from Online Learning Centre: http;//www.oandp.org/olc/lessons/html/SSC_06/section_04.asp?frmCourseSectionId=05 OECD. (2001, September 25). Glossary of Statistical Terms. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from OECD website: http://www.ecd.org/glossary/detail.ap?ID=2620 Spicer, D. (2011, August 8). Workplace Negativity-Signs, Causes & Cures. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from Aol Jobs web site: http://www.jobs.aol.com/articles/2011/11/08workplace-negativity-the-signs-causes-and-cures/ Wengrzyn, R. (2012). Job Dissatisfaction: Causes, Reasons and Employee Responses. Retrieved June 2, 2015, from study website: http://www.study.com/academy/lesson/job-dissatisfaction-causes-reasons-and-employee-responses.htn Read More