IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v16y1992i3p333-345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Reliability and Construct Validity of a Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale Used To Measure Nursing Assistant Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Carleen H. Stoskopf

    (University of South Carolina)

  • Deborah C. Glik

    (University of California, Los Angeles)

  • Samuel L. Baker

    (University of South Carolina)

  • James R. Ciesla

    (University of South Carolina)

  • Catherine M. Cover

    (University of South Carolina)

Abstract

Data are presented that demonstrate the reliability and construct validity of a 27-item Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) used to rate nursing assistant performance. A sample of 757 nursing assistants from 44 randomly selected long-term care facilities were rated with the BARS instrument by a team of independent observers, and later by the nursing assistants'supervisors. Interrater reliability between the independent observers and supervisors ranged from 0.34 to 0.96 and averaged 0.78. The internal consistency reliability measured by Cronbach's alpha was 0.71 for the independent observers, 0.76 for the supervisors. Construct validity was assessed by exploratory factor analysis. The underlying factor structure had 3 factors that accounted for 84.0% of the variance. Results were interpreted as supporting the reliability and indicating construct validity of this BARS for nursing assistants. Because BARSs have been shown to reduce subjectivity and personal bias, they are recommended for evaluating nursing assistant performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Carleen H. Stoskopf & Deborah C. Glik & Samuel L. Baker & James R. Ciesla & Catherine M. Cover, 1992. "The Reliability and Construct Validity of a Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale Used To Measure Nursing Assistant Performance," Evaluation Review, , vol. 16(3), pages 333-345, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:16:y:1992:i:3:p:333-345
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9201600307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9201600307
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X9201600307?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Niemi & Edward Carmines & John McIver, 1986. "The impact of scale length on reliability and validity," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 371-376, December.
    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. Wayne Francis & Edward Carmines, 1993. "Making measurement errors and interpreting path coefficients: a practical perspective," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 19-30, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:evarev:v:16:y:1992:i:3:p:333-345. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.