UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| In disruptive need to create healthy workplace in organization, in other side, 98% employee experienced workplace incivility. Most of experienced workplace incivility instrument is developed and validated in English, and has not been much studied about experience workplace incivility instrument adapted from English to Indonesia. Hence, the research aims to cross-culturally adapt the Workplace Incivility Scale. The process of the translation and culture adaption is referred to the guidelines for the cross cultural adaptation process, as suggested by Beaton, consisting of 6 stages. The first stage is forward translation, second stage is synthesis, third stage is back translation, the fourth stage is expert committee review, the fifth stage is pilot-test, and sixth stage is submission and appraisal of all written reports by developer’s/committee. Translation is conducted using two independent translators, two language native translators, expert committee review that consisted of four expert professional judgments at psychological field, one expert methodologist, and one expert language professional. Respondent questionnaire is used to analyse the results of pilot study on 46 employees. A validity item as a result of fifth stage is the correlation between item and total item range from 0.519 until 0.864. The item was analysed quantitatively using SPSS, and the result of the reliability with Cronbach’s Alpha is 0.861 indicating higher reliability. Based on the results of quantitative analysis of the test data, the items met the criteria of item validity and reliability. Significantly, the measuring tool can be used in the assessment employees for increasing health workplace and their performance
|
| References |
Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Effect of Tit for Tat ? the Spiraling in the Workplace Incivility. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 452–471. https://doi.org/10.2307/259136 Azwar, S. (2017). Validitas dan Reliabilitas. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of crosscultural adaptation of self-report measures, 25(24), 3186–3191. Cortina, L. M., Kabat-Farr, D., Leskinen, E. A., Huerta, M., & Magley, V. J. (2013). Selective incivility as modern discrimination in organizations: Evidence and Impact. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1579–1605. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311418835 Cortina, L. M., Kabat-Farr, D., Magley, V. J., & Nelson, K. (2017). Researching rudeness: The past, present, and future of the science of incivility. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 299–313. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000089 Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace : Incident and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1), 64–80. DuBay, M., & Watson, L. R. (2019). Translation and cultural adaptation of parent-report developmental assessments: Improving rigor in methodology. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 62(February), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2019.02.005 Epstein, J., Santo, R. M., & Guillemin, F. (2015). A review of guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of questionnaires could not bring out a consensus. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 68(4), 435–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.021 Estes, B., & Wang, J. (2008). Integrative literature review: Workplace incivility: Impacts on individual and organizational performance. Human Resource Development Review, 7(2), 218–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484308315565 Gjersing, L., Caplehorn, J. R. M., & Clausen, T. (2010). Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10(13), 1–10. Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence Based Nursing, 18(3), 66–67. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129 Hershcovis, M. S. (2011). Incivility, social undermining, bullying...oh my!’’: A call to reconcile constructs within workplace aggression research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 499–519. https://doi.org/10.1002/job Kasali, R. (2017). Disruption. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Kent, S., & Muurlink, O. (2014). Getting a grip on why incivility happens within the workplace: A commentary essay. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014- 0207-5 Leiter, M. (2013). Analyzing and theorizing the dynamics of the workplace incivility crisis. Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5571-0 Luntungan, I., Hubeis, A. V. S., Sunarti, E., & Maulana, A. (2014). The embryonic challenge from gen Y calling for s.o.s in banking industry: A call for action for hr practitioner in Indonesia. International Journal of Information Technology and Business Management, 24(1), 45–51. Maki, D., Rajab, E., Watson, P. J., & Critchley, D. J. (2017). Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Back Beliefs Questionnaire in Modern Standard Arabic. Disability and Rehabilitation, 39(3), 272–280. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2016.1140832 McCrae, R. R., Kurtz, J. E., Yamagata, S., & Terracciano, A. (2011). Internal consistency, retest reliability, and their implications for personality scale validity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310366253 McNeish, D. (2017). Thanks Coefficient Alpha , We ’ ll Take it From Here. Psychological Methods, (February), 19–57. Mohamad, M. M., Sulaiman, N. L., Sern, L. C., & Salleh, K. M. (2015). Measuring the Validity and Reliability of Research Instruments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204(November 2014), 164–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.129 P.Leiter, M., Peck, E., & Gumuchian, S. (2015). Mistreatment in Organizations Article information : Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, 13, 107–135. Paulin, D., & Griffin, B. (2016). The relationships between incivility, team climate for incivility and jobrelated employee well-being: a multilevel analysis. Work & Stress, 8373(August), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2016.1173124 Pearson, C., & Porath, C. (2009). The Cost of Bad Behavior : How Incivility Is Damaging Your Business and What. New York: Penguin. Perneger, T. V., Leplège, A., & Etter, J.-F. (2002). Cross-Cultural Adaptation of a Psychometric Instrument. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 52(11), 1037–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895- 4356(99)00088-8 Peters, G. Y. (2014). The alpha and the omega of scale reliability and validity comprehensive assessment of scale quality. The European Health Psychologist, 1(2), 56–69. Porath, C., & Pearson, C. (2013). The Price of Incivility, 15(January), 1–17. Rachmayani, Dita & Ramdhani, N. (2017). Adaptasi Bahasa dan Budaya Skala Psychological Well-Being. Conference: Seminar Nasional Psikometri. Fakultas Psikologi Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakar.. Rahim, A., & Cosby, D. M. (2016). A model of workplace incivility, job burnout, turnover intentions, and job performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(10), 1255–1265. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-09-2015-0138 Rahman, A., Iqbal, Z., Waheed, W., & Hussain, N. (2003). Translation and cultural adaptation of health questionnaires. JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 53(4), 142–7. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12776898 Rowley, J. (2014). Designing and using research questionnaires. Management Research Review, 37(3), 308–330. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-02-2013-0027 Schilpzand, P., Pater, I. E. De, & Erez, A. (2014). Workplace incivility: A review of the literature and agenda for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(S1), S57–S88. https://doi.org/10.1002/job Sguera, F., Bagozzi, R. P., Huy, Q. N., Boss, R. W., & Boss, D. S. (2016). Curtailing the harmful effects of workplace incivility: The role of structural demands and organization-provided resources. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 95–96, 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.08.004 Smidt, O., De, B. L. T., Lizelle, B., & Leiter Michael P. (2016). The validation of a workplace incivility scale within the South African banking industry. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 42(1), 1–12. Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation , adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research : A clear and user-friendly guideline scales for use in cross-cultural health care research : Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(December), 268- 274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x Sugiyono. (2010). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, R&D. Bandung: Alfabet. Tsuno, K., Kawakami, N., Shimazu, A., Shimada, K., Inoue, A., & Leiter, M. P. (2017). Workplace incivility in Japan: Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the modified Work Incivility Scale. Journal of Occupational Health, 59(3), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1539/joh.16-0196-OA Vagharseyyedin, A. S. (2015). Workplace incivility: a concept analysis. Contemporary Nurse, 50(1), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/10376178.2015.1010262 Warsini, S., Buettner, P., Mills, J., West, C., & Usher, K. (2014). Translation, cultural adaptation, and psychometric testing of the environmental distress scale with indonesian survivors of a volcanic eruption. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 8(3), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2014.45 Zhou, Z. (2014). Effects of Workplace Incivility on Nurses’ Emotions, Well-being, and Behaviors: A Longitudinal Study. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (Vol. 75). Retrieved from http://sfx.scholarsportal.info/guelph/docview/1614193152?accountid=11233%5Cnhttp://sfx.schol arsportal.info/guelph?url_ver=Z39.88- 2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&genre=dissertations+&+theses&sid=ProQ:P roQuest+Dissertations+&+Theses+A&. Access date at 14 January 2017
|
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |