IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i11p6317-d567758.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Study on Developing a Communicative Rational Action Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmet Yavuz Çamlı

    (Department of Management and Organization, Kula Vocational School, Manisa Celal Bayar University, 45140 Manisa, Turkey)

  • Florina Oana Virlanuta

    (Department of Economics, “Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati, 800201 Galati, Romania)

  • Bedrettin Türker Palamutçuoğlu

    (Department of Management and Organization, Kula Vocational School, Manisa Celal Bayar University, 45140 Manisa, Turkey)

  • Nicoleta Bărbuță-Mișu

    (Department of Business Administration, “Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati, 800201 Galati, Romania)

  • Şeref Güler

    (School of Foreign Languages, Manisa Celal Bayar University, 45140 Manisa, Turkey)

  • Deniz Züngün

    (Department of Management and Organization, Ahmetli Vocational School, Manisa Celal Bayar University, 45140 Manisa, Turkey)

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop a Communicative Rational Action Scale and analyze its validity and reliability. The scale has been prepared for all administrators and especially for firm administrators based on Max Weber’s rationalizing theory and Jürgen Habermas’ communicative action theory. The scale reveals to what extent administrators’ behaviors are communicatively rational while deciding or acting. In total, 282 participants joined this study. The sample group consisted of senior administrators of 87 firms acting in Turkey’s different Organized Industrial Zones or Free Zones. Data were analyzed by the SPSS 21 and AMOS 22 programs. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were applied to the obtained data. In order to test item discrimination, total item correlations were calculated and items under the value of 0.40 were removed from the scale. Exploratory factor analysis revealed 21 articles and five factors. The correlation coefficient of the 21-article scale with a similar scale is 0.979 ( p < 0.001). The Cronbach’s alpha value is 0.945 and the test–retest correlation parameter is r = 0.793 ( p < 0.001). In conclusion, it was determined by confirmatory factor analysis that the Communicative Rational Action Scale has a good cohesion criterion, and it is a valid and reliable assessment instrument.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmet Yavuz Çamlı & Florina Oana Virlanuta & Bedrettin Türker Palamutçuoğlu & Nicoleta Bărbuță-Mișu & Şeref Güler & Deniz Züngün, 2021. "A Study on Developing a Communicative Rational Action Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6317-:d:567758
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6317/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6317/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davide Cantoni, 2015. "The Economic Effects Of The Protestant Reformation: Testing The Weber Hypothesis In The German Lands," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 561-598, August.
    2. Duckett, Dominic George & McKee, Annie J. & Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Kyle, Carol & Boden, Lisa A. & Auty, Harriet & Bessell, Paul R. & McKendrick, Iain J., 2017. "Scenario planning as communicative action: Lessons from participatory exercises conducted for the Scottish livestock industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 138-151.
    3. Violina P. Rindova & Luis L. Martins, 2018. "From Values to Value: Value Rationality and the Creation of Great Strategies," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 323-334, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Valencia Caicedo, Felipe & Dohmen, Thomas & Pondorfer, Andreas, 2023. "Religion and cooperation across the globe," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 215(C), pages 479-489.
    2. Holger Strulik, 2016. "Secularization And Long-Run Economic Growth," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(1), pages 177-200, January.
    3. Becker, Sascha O. & Pfaff, Steven & Rubin, Jared, 2016. "Causes and consequences of the Protestant Reformation," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-25.
    4. Adrian Chadi & Matthias Krapf, 2017. "The Protestant Fiscal Ethic: Religious Confession And Euro Skepticism In Germany," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1813-1832, October.
    5. Chaudhary, Latika & Rubin, Jared, 2016. "Religious identity and the provision of public goods: Evidence from the Indian Princely States," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 461-483.
    6. Becker, Sascha O. & Rubin, Jared & Woessmann, Ludger, 2020. "Religion in Economic History: A Survey," CEPR Discussion Papers 14894, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Mathias Bühler & Leonhard Vollmer & Johannes Wimmer, 2024. "Female education and social change," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 79-119, March.
    8. Davide Cantoni, 2012. "Adopting a New Religion: the Case of Protestantism in 16th Century Germany," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(560), pages 502-531, May.
    9. Sascha O. BECKER & Francesco CINNIRELLA, 2020. "Prussia Disaggregated: The Demography of its Universe of Localities in 1871," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(3), pages 259-290, September.
    10. Luca Nunziata & Lorenzo Rocco, 2024. "The protestant ethic and entrepreneurship: inside the black box," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(4), pages 1285-1313, April.
    11. Thomas Barnebeck Andersen & Jeanet Bentzen & Carl-Johan Dalgaard & Paul Sharp, 2010. "Religious Orders and Growth through Cultural Change in Pre-Industrial England," DEGIT Conference Papers c015_036, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    12. Eberhard Feess & Helge Mueller & Sabrina G. Ruhnau, 2014. "The Impact of Religion and the Degree of Religiosity on Work Ethic: A Multilevel Analysis," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(4), pages 506-534, November.
    13. Johanna Jacobi & Aymara Llanque, 2018. "“When We Stand up, They Have to Negotiate with Us”: Power Relations in and between an Agroindustrial and an Indigenous Food System in Bolivia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, November.
    14. Falck, Oliver & Heblich, Stephan & Lameli, Alfred & Südekum, Jens, 2012. "Dialects, cultural identity, and economic exchange," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 225-239.
    15. Opfinger, Matthias & Gundlach, Erich, 2011. "Religiosity as a determinant of happiness," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 48360, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    16. Lars Boerner & Daniel Quint, 2023. "Medieval Matching Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(1), pages 23-56, February.
    17. Felix S.F. Schaff, 2023. "The Unequal Spirit of the Protestant Reformation: Particularism and Wealth Distribution in Early Modern Germany," Working Papers 0239, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).
    18. Sascha O. Becker & Jared Rubin & Ludger Woessmann, 2024. "Religion and Growth," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1094-1142, September.
    19. Hasan, Iftekhar & Noth, Felix & Tonzer, Lena, 2023. "Cultural norms and corporate fraud: Evidence from the Volkswagen scandal," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    20. Stelios Michalopoulos & Elias Papaioannou, 2020. "Historical Legacies and African Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(1), pages 53-128, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6317-:d:567758. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.