Consideration of future consequences scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Personality and Individual Differences

Volumn 48, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 654-657

  Hevey, D ^a   Pertl, M ^a   Thomas, K ^a   Maher, L ^a   Craig, A ^a   Ni Chuinneagain, S ^a  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Confirmatory Factor Analysis; Consideration of future consequences; Method effects

Indexed keywords

EID: 76449121188     PISSN: 01918869     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.006     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Benson J., and Hocevar D. The impact of item phrasing on the validity of attitude scales for elementary school children. Journal of Educational Measurement 22 (1985) 231-240
2. Bentler P.M., and Bonett D.G. Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 88 (1980) 588-600
3. Cordery J.L., and Sevastos P. Dimensionality of new and revised versions of job diagnostic survey as affected by educational attainment. Journal of Applied Psychology 78 (1993) 141-143
4. Duke D., Krishnan M., Faith M., and Storch E.A. The psychometric properties of the brief fear of negative evaluation scale. Anxiety Disorders 20 (2006) 807-817
5. Gerbing D.W., and Anderson J.C. On the meaning of within-factor correlated measurement errors. Journal of Consumer Research 11 (1984) 572-580
6. Hankins M. The factor structure of the twelve item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): The result of negative phrasing?. Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health 4 (2008) 10
7. Hu L., and Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6 (1999) 1-55
8. Joireman J.A., Anderson J., and Strathman A. The aggression paradox: Understanding links among aggression, sensation seeking, and the consideration of future consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84 (2003) 1287-1302
9. Joireman J., Balliet D., Sprott D., Spangenberg E., and Schultz J. Ego depletion, consideration of future consequences, and decision-making preferences: Implications for the self-regulation of behavior. Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 15-21
10. Joireman J., Strathman A., and Balliet D. Considering future consequences: An integrative model. In: Sanna L., and Chang E. (Eds). Judgments over time: The interplay of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (2006), Oxford University Press, Oxford 82-99
11. Le H., Schmidt F.L., and Putka D.J. The multifaceted nature of measurement artifacts and its implications for estimating construct-level relationships. Organizational Research Methods 12 (2009) 165-200
12. Lewin K. Time perspective and morale. In: Watson G. (Ed). Civilian morale. Second yearbook of the S.P.S.S.L. (1942), Houghton Mifflin, Boston 48-70
13. Lindell M.K., and Whitney D.J. Accounting for common method variance in cross sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 86 (2001) 114-121
14. Lucke J.F. "Rassling the hog": The influence of correlated item error on internal consistency, classical reliability, and congeneric reliability. Applied Psychological Measurement 29 (2005) 106-125
15. Magazine S.L., Williams L.J., and Williams M.L. A confirmatory factor analysis examination of reverse coding effects in Meyer and Allen's affective and continuance commitment scales. Education and Psychological Measurement 56 (1996) 241-250
16. Marsh H.W. Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (1996) 810-819
17. Nunnally J.C. Psychometric theory (1967), McGraw-Hill, New York
18. Petrocelli J.V. Factor validation of the consideration of future consequences scale. Journal of Social Psychology 143 (2003) 404-413
19. Pilotte W., and Gable R.K. The impact of positive and negative item stems on the validity of a computer anxiety scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement 50 (1990) 603-610
20. Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Lee J.Y., and Podsakoff N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (2003) 879-903
21. Richardson H.A., Simmering M.J., and Sturman M.C. A tale of three perspectives: Examining post hoc statistical techniques for detection and correction of common method variance. Organizational Research Methods 12 (2009) 762-800
22. Rosenberg M. Society and the adolescent child (1965), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
23. Rozeboom W.W. The reliability of a linear composite of non-equivalent subtests. Applied Psychological Measurement 13 (1989) 277-283
24. Scheier M.F., Carver C.S., and Bridges M.W. Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A re-evaluation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67 (1994) 1063-1078
25. Schmitt N., and Stults D.M. Factors defined by negatively keyed items: The result of careless respondents?. Applied Psychological Measurement 9 (1985) 367-373
26. Schriesheim C.A., and Hill H.D. Controlling acquiescence response bias by item reversals: The effect on questionnaire validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement 41 (1981) 1101-1114
27. Strathman A., Gleicher F., Boninger D.S., and Edwards C.S. The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66 (1994) 742-752
28. Tepper B.J., and Tepper K. The effects of method variance within measures. The Journal of Psychology 127 (1993) 293-302
29. Williams L.J., Cote J.A., and Buckley M.R. Lack of method effect variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artefact?. Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (1989) 462-468
30. Williams L.J., Edwards J.R., and Vandenberg R.J. Recent advances in causal modelling methods for organizational and management research. Journal of Management 29 (2003) 903-936