2021
DOI: 10.5093/jwop2021a8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Heavy-Work Investment: Its dimensionality, Invariance across 9 Countries and Levels before and during the COVID-19’s Pandemic

Abstract: The goals of the current comparative and half-exploratory paper are to: 1) shed light on the properties of the relatively "new" construct, Heavy-Work Investment (HWI) and its two dimensions -Time Commitment and Work Intensity, (2) assess differences across 9 countries in relation to HWI, (3) gauge the effect of demographical parameters on HWI, and (4) investigate the interaction between them and COVID-19's pandemic (i.e., before COVID-19, and during the COVID-19 pandemic). Data of 3,418 employees were collecte… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These are (a) Harman’s single-factor method (all items are loaded on one common factor) and (b) a common latent factor method (all items are loaded on two types of factors – their expected factors and one latent common method factor). Analysis by Harman’s single-factor model accounts for only 21.81% of the explained variance and is a good fit [ 11 , 46 , 48 – 50 ]. Indices were: χ 2 (2696) = 8,491.17; p = .000; χ 2 /df = 3.15; Comparative Fit index = 0.78, Normed fit index = 0.75, The goodness of fit index = 0.86, SRMR = 0.13, and the root mean square error of approximation [90% CI] = 0.18 [0.14-0.29], p-close = 0.004.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These are (a) Harman’s single-factor method (all items are loaded on one common factor) and (b) a common latent factor method (all items are loaded on two types of factors – their expected factors and one latent common method factor). Analysis by Harman’s single-factor model accounts for only 21.81% of the explained variance and is a good fit [ 11 , 46 , 48 – 50 ]. Indices were: χ 2 (2696) = 8,491.17; p = .000; χ 2 /df = 3.15; Comparative Fit index = 0.78, Normed fit index = 0.75, The goodness of fit index = 0.86, SRMR = 0.13, and the root mean square error of approximation [90% CI] = 0.18 [0.14-0.29], p-close = 0.004.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, only articles published up to 2020 were analyzed. However, in 2021, one psychometric study has been published that present tools specific to the HWI considering Time Commitment and Work Intensity as dimensions [62]. Thus, the aforementioned limitations should be taken into consideration for future studies, where other instruments are analyzed, that can help to understand this construct that is in full development and boom in terms of research to have a clearer approximation of its functioning.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Affum-Osei et al, 2019;Boyd and Nowell, 2017) or CMV-corrected composites (e.g. Lindell and Whitney, 2001;Podsakoff et al, 2003;Richardson et al, 2009;Shkoler et al, 2021a). We utilized AMOS (v. 28) in order to use the multiple imputations.…”
Section: Common-methods Bias Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%