Discussion: View Thread

Call for Brief Proposals: SCALE/MEASURE VALIDATIONS Involving Counterproductive Work Behavior

  • 1.  Call for Brief Proposals: SCALE/MEASURE VALIDATIONS Involving Counterproductive Work Behavior

    Posted 17 days ago

    Hi folks,

     

    Apologies for cross-postings!

     

    Together with my colleagues Dr. Sandy Lim and Dr. Jaclyn Jensen, I'll be editing the Handbook of Counterproductive Work Behavior, which will be published by Edward Elgar Publishing. In that context, we're planning to include one or possibly two chapters involving scale (or more broadly measure) development and validation involving constructs closely related to counterproductive work behavior.

     

    If you're interested in contributing a chapter on this topic, we'd love to hear from you! To that end, please consider this email a Call for Proposals (brief ones!). By October 1, 2022, could you please send us the following information?

     

    • Author CVs. You would be most welcome to include a coauthor (or if necessary two) of your choice-for instance, a colleague or a graduate student-but please include the CVs of all proposed authors.
    • Brief description of the authors' prior experience, if any, in the area of scale development and validation. Prior experience is a plus but its absence is by no means a deal-breaker.
    • A chapter plan (2-3 pages) containing the following information:
      • The name and definition of the construct for which the scale will be developed and validated. Note that the construct does not necessarily have to be counterproductive work behavior (CWB) itself or a specific form thereof, but the construct should be inextricably related to CWB rather than simply being, say, an antecedent or correlate. For instance, a scale development and validation effort involving any of the following has the potential to be a good fit: active vs. passive forms of CWB, CWB climate, receipt of CWB from others, third-party observations of CWB, the perceived benefits of CWB to the perpetrator, sexual harassment perpetration, passive aggressive behavior, a game-based assessment of CWB, or an assessment of CWB based on disciplinary citations. In contrast, an effort involving organizational justice climate (even as an antecedent to CWB) would not be a sufficiently good fit. As the aforementioned examples suggest, the measure in question does not have to be a self-report or even survey measure; other options, such as policy-capturing designs or ostensibly "objective" assessments have the potential to be a good fit as well.
      • A rationale for why it is necessary or desirable to develop and validate a scale on this particular CWB-related construct. For instance, how would this scale be useful in future research and practice/policy? Additionally, if the scale being developed involves an existing construct for which one or more scales already exist (vs. a novel construct for which no scales currently exist), how would the proposed scale contribute beyond existing scales?
      • In brief, your hypotheses and research questions as well as your proposed sample (in terms of the nature of participants and the context in which they will be studied), other study design features, and data-analytic techniques.
      • The sample size that will be used for the replication study. If possible, please also summarize the results of a power analysis and/or other information (e.g., commonly used rules of thumb) relevant to sample size.
      • Whether the research will be pre-registered and a priori hypotheses and research questions, de-identified data, and code posted online (e.g., via the Open Science Framework) for the benefit of readers. If the answer is "no," please explain why not.
      • Any additional best practices associated with scale development that will be incorporated.

     

    Please send the above information to all the editors (i.e., rdalal@gmu.edu, sandylim@nus.edu.sg, and jjense10@depaul.edu). We will respond within a few weeks with constructive feedback and information regarding whether we will be able to incorporate your proposed chapter in the handbook.

     

    Here is some additional information about the handbook:

     

    Once the handbook is published, each contributing author may choose to receive either one hardback copy of the handbook or else one complimentary digital copy of the handbook along with a PDF of their own chapter.

     

    We have set June 15, 2023, as the due date for submitting the full draft of each chapter, giving you ample time to think, collect data, and write. Chapters should be 8,000-10,000 words in length all inclusive, and should include the following elements:

    • title
    • abstract (150-word limit)
    • keywords (up to 6 key words or phrases)
    • "body" of the chapter
    • endnotes (as opposed to footnotes)
    • references (which should be in American Psychological Association Style)
    • tables (with each table counting as the equivalent of 300 words)
    • figures (with each figure counting as the equivalent of 500 words).

     

    After receiving and reviewing the draft of your chapter, we may request revisions aimed at correcting any errors and at improving clarity and organization as well as fit with the overall handbook. We are planning for final versions of the chapters to be due in January 2024.

     

    Please let us know if you have any questions!

     

    Sincerely,

    Reeshad (on behalf of the editor team)



    ------------------------------
    Reeshad Dalal, Ph.D.
    Professor, Industrial and Organizational Psychology
    George Mason University
    Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
    rdalal@gmu.edu
    http://psychology.gmu.edu/people/rdalal
    https://sites.google.com/site/reeshaddalal
    ------------------------------