A TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF
Dr. Hannah-Hanh D. Nguyen
PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
This technical report presents the key data analytic findings that may evidence the construct validity of the GiftsCompass Instrument (revised version; GCI-R). Specifically, this report presents the psychometric properties of the GCI-R (item and scale reliability), the factor structure of the measure, as well as the initial evidence for the GCI-R convergent, divergent and discriminant validity.
This technical report consists of two sections: (a) the main text describing and summarizing the data analytic findings, and (b) the appendices presenting the detailed results. An e-file of the recoded data set (run on SPSS for Windows) is also part of the technical report packet and will be submitted separately.
To establish the reliability and construct validity of the measure, the consultant used the data collected from a development sample of up to 250 respondents to conduct several analyses that would answer the key questions about the GCI-R reliability and construct validity.
To quantitatively answer the question whether the GCI-R subscales have internal consistency, the consultant examined the item and scale reliability of individual subscales (i.e., a combination between each of two Extraversion and Introversion attitudes and each of four psychological functions as theorized by Jung). The consultant also examined the reliability of an encompassing scale of either Extraversion items or Introversion items regardless of original functions.
The consultant found that the reliability results for the GCI were generally desirable. Specifically, five subscales have acceptable or satisfactory levels of internal consistency; the consistency of three subscales are lower but not poor and can be improved by fine-tuning the content of some scale items. At the high-order level (either Extraversion or Introversion), the internal consistency is satisfactory, showing that each set of items/attributes do assess either attitude.
The consultant then conducted the inter-scale relation analyses. The results showed that the four Extraversion subscales indeed measured a similar construct and yet each subscale might capture additional, unique information associated with any of the four functions (sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking). So did the four Introversion subscales.
The GCI-R subscales were correlated with the International Personality Item Pool. With one exception, the GCI-R appears to have both convergent and divergent validity when both GCI-R Extraversion and Introversion subscales were correlated with the Extraversion subscale of the IPIP. Furthermore, most of the GCI-R subscales did not have significant relationships with indicators of respondents' academic achievement and/or cognitive ability. Any significant relationships were found to be in the negative direction and/or having only moderate or weak magnitudes. Altogether, the data supported the convergent and divergent validity of the GCI-R—another piece of construct validity evidence.
To answer the question whether the data supported an 8-factor typology as conceptualized by Jung, the consultant conducted a series of exploratory factor analyses. The results were mixed: the structure of subscales held up relatively well at either the full-measure level or at the Extraversion/Introversion level (ET, EF, EN, IT, IF) pending some revision; However, the other three factors were not very clear cut in terms of scale structure and scale meaning (e.g., items from different subscales ending up in a factor). The factor analytic findings might be because of the relatively small sample size (i.e., fewer than 10 respondents for each item or 400 respondents) though.
The discriminant validity of the GCI-R was explored. The results showed tentative support for discriminant validity: certain personality subscales as measured with the GCI-R might have a relationship with employment status.
©Copyright 2002-2008, Gifts Compass, Inc.