Psychometric Properties and Measurement Invariance of a Short Form of the Unified Multidimensional Calling Scale (UMCS)

Abstract

Abstract. This paper reports on the development of a unidimensional short scale for measuring career calling (UMCS-7). The scale has been developed drawing from the theoretical model behind the Unified Multidimensional Calling Scale (UMCS; Vianello et al., 2018 ), according to which calling is composed of Passion, Prosociality, Purpose, Pervasiveness, Sacrifice, Transcendent Summons, and Identity. The UMCS-7 integrates classical and modern conceptualizations of career calling and can be used when time constraints prevent using the UMCS. The UMCS-7 has been validated in a sample of Italian workers ( N = 1,246) using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. A sample of US employees ( N = 165) was used to estimate measurement invariance across languages, establishing the equivalence of factor loadings, all but two intercepts, and all error variances. The UMCS-7 demonstrated nearly perfect convergent validity with the UMCS ( r = .97), excellent internal consistency (αItaly = .86; αUS = .87), and satisfactory concurrent validity with job satisfaction, life satisfaction, and turnover intentions.

Is Calling Conceptualized Equivalently across Cultures? A Comparative Study across Six Countries

“…The scale has the widest construct coverage than all other measures of calling (for a review, see Gerdel et al, 2022): It measures an internal drive for self-fulfillment, enjoyment, and meaning, which are typical facets of the modern approaches to calling (passion, pervasiveness, purposeful work, and identity) and external references to the source of a calling, in line with a neoclassical approach (transcendent summons, prosocial orientation, and sacrifice; Thompson & Bunderson, 2019). Example items per each dimension of calling are: passion (i.e.…”

“…"What I study is part of who I am"). In this study, we used the 28-item version of the UMCS (Gerdel et al, 2022;Vianello et al, 2022), which is an improved version derived from the UMCS-22 (Vianello et al, 2018) that shows higher internal consistency and an improved factor structure over the UMCS-22. Supplemental information and detailed results supporting the psychometric properties of the UMCS-28 and its improvements over the 22-item version are available at the following link: https://osf.io/7ftx6/?view_only=975506f3d9194c3c99d1fbfc9b4cb5fe.…”

“…Another study that investigated equivalence in the conceptualization of calling was conducted by Gerdel et al (2022). The authors found support for partial strict invariance across U.S. (N = 165) and Italian participants (N = 1246) of a short unidimensional calling scale.…”

“…Few studies investigated the cross-cultural equivalence of existing measures of calling. Specifically, these studies were conducted in the United States and India (Autin et al, 2017), the United States and South Korea (Ahn et al, 2021), and the United States and Italy (Gerdel et al, 2022). However, no study compared more than two nations nor more than three out of the seven definitional components dimensions of calling that can be found in the literature (Dik & Shimizu, 2019;Thompson & Bunderson, 2019;Vianello et al, 2018).…”

“…Recently, some attempts have been made to test measurement equivalence of calling scales comparatively across two cultures (Autin et al, 2017;Ahn et al, 2021;Gerdel et al, 2022). Autin et al (2017) examined measurement equivalence of both perceiving and living a calling, using the CVQ ) and the Living a Calling Scale (LCS; Duffy, Bott, Allan, Torrey & Dik, 2012) across two samples of U.S. (N = 336) and Indian (N = 321) workers.…”