The validity of organizational research relies on strong research methods, which include effective measurement of psychological constructs. The general consensus is that multiple item measures have better psychometric properties than single-item measures. However, due to practical constraints (e.g., survey length, respondent burden) there are situations in which certain single items may be useful for capturing information about constructs that might otherwise go unmeasured. We evaluated 37 items, including 18 newly developed items as well as 19 single items selected from existing multiple-item scales based on psychometric characteristics, to assess 18 constructs frequently measured in organizational and occupational health psychology research. We examined evidence of reliability; convergent, discriminant, and content validity assessments; and test-retest reliabilities at 1- and 3-month time lags for single-item measures using a multistage and multisource validation strategy across 3 studies, including data from N = 17 occupational health subject matter experts and N = 1,634 survey respondents across 2 samples. Items selected from existing scales generally demonstrated better internal consistency reliability and convergent validity, whereas these particular new items generally had higher levels of content validity. We offer recommendations regarding when use of single items may be more or less appropriate, as well as 11 items that seem acceptable, 14 items with mixed results that might be used with caution due to mixed results, and 12 items we do not recommend using as single-item measures. Although multiple-item measures are preferable from a psychometric standpoint, in some circumstances single-item measures can provide useful information.

Employees around the world have experienced sudden, significant changes in their work and family roles due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, applied psychologists have limited understanding of how employee experiences of work-family conflict and enrichment have been affected by this event and what organizations can do to ensure better employee functioning during such societal crises. Adopting a person-centered approach, we examine transitions in employees' work-family interfaces from before COVID-19 to after its onset. First, in Study 1, using latent profile analysis (N ϭ 379; nonpandemic data), we identify profiles of bidirectional conflict and enrichment, including beneficial (low conflict and high enrichment), active (medium conflict and enrichment), and passive (low conflict and enrichment). In Study 2, with data collected before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, we replicate Study 1 profiles and explore whether employees transition between work-family profiles during the pandemic. Results suggest that although many remain in prepandemic profiles, positive (from active/passive to beneficial) and negative (from beneficial to active/passive) transitions occurred for a meaningful proportion of respondents. People were more likely to go through negative transitions if they had high segmentation preferences, engaged in emotion-focused coping, experienced higher technostress, and had less compassionate supervisors. In turn, negative transitions were associated with negative employee consequences during the pandemic (e.g., lower job satisfaction and job performance, and higher turnover intent). We discuss implications for future research and for managing during societal crises, both present and future.

No abstract

While researchers are increasingly interested in understanding the boundaries surrounding the work and personal life domains, few have tested the propositions set forth by theory. Boundary theory proposes that individuals manage the boundaries between work and personal life through processes of segmenting and/or integrating the domains. The authors investigated boundary management profiles of 332 workers in an investigation of the segmentation-integration continuum. Cluster analysis indicated consistent clusters of boundary management practices related to varying segmentation and integration of the work and personal life domains. But, the authors suggest that the segmentation-integration continuum may be more complicated. Results also indicated relationships between boundary management practices and work-personal life interference and work-personal life enhancement. Less flexible and more permeable boundaries were related to more interference, while more flexible and more permeable boundaries were related to more enhancement.

No abstract

Although work–family research has mushroomed over the past several decades, an implementation gap persists in putting work–family research into practice. Because of this, work–family researchers have not made a significant impact in improving the lives of employees relative to the amount of research that has been conducted. The goal of this article is to clarify areas where implementation gaps between work–family research and practice are prevalent, discuss the importance of reducing these gaps, and make the case that both better and different research should be conducted. We recommend several alternative but complementary actions for the work–family researcher: (a) work with organizations to study their policy and practice implementation efforts, (b) focus on the impact of rapid technological advances that are blurring work–family boundaries, (c) conduct research to empower the individual to self-manage the work–family interface, and (d) engage in advocacy and collaborative policy research to change institutional contexts and break down silos. Increased partnerships between industrial–organizational (I–O) psychology practitioners and researchers from many industries and disciplines could break down silos that we see as limiting development of the field.

No abstract

Psychometric case identification of individuals at risk for developing schizophrenia-spectrum disorders is an important enterprise. Unfortunately, current instruments for this purpose are limited. The present studies sought to improve the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire-Brief (SPQ-Brief), a measure of schizotypal traits that has come under recent criticism. In the first study, we conducted exploratory factor analysis on the SPQ-Brief using a Likert-style scoring format in a large sample of nonclinical adults. Although acceptable internal consistency was found, the original factor structure was not supported. In the second study, we administered the full version of the SPQ to a separate large nonclinical adult sample and employed exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to identify critical items that could be used to revise the SPQ-Brief. The end product of these studies is the SPQ-Brief Revised, which offers a subordinate seven-factor and super-ordinate three or four factor solution, employs a Likert-scale format to improve sensitivity, and is brief (34 items).