A Comparison of the Validity, Predictiveness and Consistency of a Trait Versus Situational Measure of Attributions
Document Type
Contribution to Book
Publication Date
1995
Publication Title
Attribution Theory
DOI
https://www.doi.org/10.4324/9781315137926-4
ISBN
9781315137926
Abstract
This chapter explores the issues of validity, predictiveness, and consistency of a trait versus situational measure of attributions. Before these types of instruments can be used in organizational settings to select employees and develop training programs, it is necessary to demonstrate their generalizability from research settings to organizational adoption. It is argued in this chapter that this adoption may be premature. Further research should be conducted and the measures refined before they are standardized for use in organizational settings. The results of this study do provide support for past research and show that these instruments do exhibit a relatively high degree of validity and consistency, but their predictive validity is questionable. The results also show that the use of both a general attributional style questionnaire and a situationally based measure can add insight into behavior and performance. The study suggests that both trait and situational measures should be used to predict behavior.
Recommended Citation
Henry, John W., Constance Campbell.
1995.
"A Comparison of the Validity, Predictiveness and Consistency of a Trait Versus Situational Measure of Attributions."
Attribution Theory (1st): 35-51 Deland, FL: Taylor & Francis Group-St. Lucie Press.
doi: https://www.doi.org/10.4324/9781315137926-4 source: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315137926-4/comparison-validity-predictiveness-consistency-trait-versus-situational-measure-attributions-john-henry-constance-campbell isbn: 9781315137926
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/management-facpubs/105
