1974
DOI: 10.1177/001316447403400115
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Little Jiffy, Mark Iv

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

21
1,310
2
69

Year Published

2000
2000
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,332 publications
(1,416 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
21
1,310
2
69
Order By: Relevance
“…These items reflected activities aside from everyday transportation that required time beyond the work day. Although the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (K-M-O) statistic for the factors was low (.51), it exceeded the threshold for factor analysis (Kaiser, 1974). Additionally, the two factors parallel those identified by Baecke, Burema, and Fritjers (1982).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…These items reflected activities aside from everyday transportation that required time beyond the work day. Although the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (K-M-O) statistic for the factors was low (.51), it exceeded the threshold for factor analysis (Kaiser, 1974). Additionally, the two factors parallel those identified by Baecke, Burema, and Fritjers (1982).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…There was a ratio of at least 2:1 participants to variables [43], and examination of the correlation matrix revealed a high proportion of correlations over 0.3, indicating the data was factorable [45]. Kaiser and Rice's [46] Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was 0.844, and Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant ([chi square] = 3326.12, p < .001), indicating high sampling adequacy [47].…”
Section: Insert Table One Here 32 Selection Of Items For Factor Analmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first four components were considered in the factors analysis, with eigenvalues higher than one, which in this case, showed an acceptable interval (Kaiser and Rice, 1974). These principal components explain approximately 75% of the total variance (Table 2).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%