Perceived Opportunities to Craft Scale: adaptation and evidence of the construct validity of the Brazilian version

Devotto, Rita Pimenta de; Freitas, Clarissa Pinto Pizarro de; Wechsler, Solange Muglia

doi:10.1186/s41155-020-00158-5

Rita Pimenta de Devotto ^**Correspondence: rita.pimenta@facamp.com.br; rpimentad@gmail.com

RPD is professor of Business Administration at the Faculdades de Campinas (Facamp) and a PhD candidate in Psychology at the Catholic Pontifical University of Campinas (PUC-Campinas). Master in Psychology by the Catholic Pontifical University of Campinas (PUC-Campinas) and Executive MBA, IAE Business School, Argentina.

Faculdades de Campinas (Facamp), Avenida Alan Turing, 805, Cidade Universitária, Campinas, São Paulo 13083-898, Brazil

Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUCCAMP), Avenida Alan Turing, 805, Cidade Universitária, Campinas, Campinas, Brazil

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2287-2526

Clarissa Pinto Pizarro de Freitas

CPPF is Associate Professor of the Graduate Program in Clinical Psychology at the Catholic Pontifical University of Rio de Janeiro. PhD in Psychology from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRS). Works with positive organizational psychology and psychometric.

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2274-8728

Solange Muglia Wechsler

SMW is professor at the Graduate Psychology Department of Catholic Pontifical University of Campinas (PUC-Campinas). PhD by the Department of Psychology, University of Georgia (UGA). She is the chief editor of Estudos de Psicologia (Psychological Studies) and is past president of the Brazilian Institute of Psychological Assessment. Currently, she is the president of the Brazilian Association of Creativity and Innovation and a council member of the International Testing Commission (ITC).

Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUCCAMP), Avenida Alan Turing, 805, Cidade Universitária, Campinas, Campinas, Brazil

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9757-9113

*Correspondence: rita.pimenta@facamp.com.br; rpimentad@gmail.com

Authors’ contributions

RPD conceived the study, participated in its design, worked in the data collection, and wrote the manuscript. CPPF analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. SMW conceived the study, participated in its design, and reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests Author details

POCS-L7				POCS-L7 (e1-e2 correlated)				POCS-L5
Items	F. L.	τ		Items	F. L.	τ		Items	F.L.	τ
1	0.830^* * p < .001	1	−1.027^* * p < .001	1	0.694^* * p < .001	1	−0.027^* * p < .001	1	0.795^* * p < .001	1	−1.346^* * p < .001
		2	−0.741^* * p < .001			2	−0.741^* * p < .001			2	−0.763^* * p < .001
		3	−0.503^* * p < .001			3	−0.503^* * p < .001			3	−0.498^* * p < .001
		4	−0.176			4	−0.176			4	0.562^* * p < .001
		5	0.150^* * p < .001			5	0.150^* * p < .001	2	0.651^* * p < .001	1	−1.264^* * p < .001
		6	0.702^* * p < .001			6	0.702^* * p < .001			2	−0.735^* * p < .001
2	0.780^* * p < .001	1	−0.996^* * p < .001	2	0.625^* * p < .001	1	−0.996^* * p < .001			3	−0.467^* * p < .001
		2	−0.619^* * p < .001			2	−0.619^* * p < .001			4	0.699^* * p < .001
		3	−0.396^* * p < .001			3	−0.396^* * p < .001	3	0.579^* * p < .001	1	−1.833^* * p < .001
		4	−0.030^* * p < .001			4	−0.030^* * p < .001			2	−1.280^* * p < .001
		5	0.357^* * p < .001			5	0.357^* * p < .001			3	−0.744^* * p < .001
		6	0.934^* * p < .001			6	0.934^* * p < .001			4	0.375^* * p < .001
3	0.729^* * p < .001	1	−0.438^* * p < .001	3	0.762^* * p < .001	1	−0.438^* * p < .001	4	0.836^* * p < .001	1	−1.438^* * p < .001
		2	−0.112^* * p < .001			2	−0.112^* * p < .001			2	−1.047^* * p < .001
		3	−0.741^* * p < .001			3	−0.741^* * p < .001			3	−0.801^* * p < .001
		4	−0.387^* * p < .001			4	−0.387^* * p < .001			4	0.236^* * p < .001
		5	0.011^* * p < .001			5	0.011^* * p < .001	5	0.741^* * p < .001	1	−1.176^* * p < .001
		6	0.522^* * p < .001			6	0.522^* * p < .001			2	−0.735^* * p < .001
4	0.813^* * p < .001	1	−0.376^* * p < .001	4	0.851^* * p < .001	1	−0.376^* * p < .001			3	−0.294^* * p < .001
		2	−0.083^* * p < .001			2	−0.083^* * p < .001			4	0.646^* * p < .001
		3	−0.845^* * p < .001			3	−0.845^* * p < .001
		4	−0.527^* * p < .001			4	−0.527^* * p < .001
		5	−0.097^* * p < .001			5	−0.097^* * p < .001
		6	0.406^* * p < .001			6	0.406^* * p < .001
5	0.781^* * p < .001	1	−0.066^* * p < .001	5	0.822^* * p < .001	1	−0.066^* * p < .001
		2	−0.768^* * p < .001			2	−0.768^* * p < .001
		3	−0.517^* * p < .001			3	−0.517^* * p < .001
		4	−0.178^* * p < .001			4	−0.178^* * p < .001
		5	0.204^* * p < .001			5	0.204^* * p < .001
		6	0.679^* * p < .001			6	0.679^* * p < .001
Goodness-of-fit indexes			χ² (df)		χ ² /df	TLI	CFI	RMSEA (90% C.I.)
POCS-L7			564.99* (5)		113.00	0.848	0.924	0.321 (0.299-0.343)
POCS-L7 (e1-e2 correlated)			12.39* (4)		3.10	0.997	0.999	0.044 (0.017-0.073)
POCS-L5			12.44* (5)		2.48	0.981	0.962	0.064(0.019-0.110)

POCS-L7 (e1-e2 correlated)	χ² (gl)	CFI	ΔCFI	RMSEA	ΔRMSEA
Unconstrained model	3.91 (8)	0.999	−	0.038	−
Metric invariance	10.34 (12)	0.998	0.001	0.047	0.010
Scalar invariance	66.32 (36)	0.988	0.010	0.069	0.022
Uniqueness invariance	66.82 (37)	0.995	0.007	0.042	0.027
POCS-L5	χ² (gl)	CFI	ΔCFI	RMSEA	ΔRMSEA
Unconstrained model	10.06 (10)	0.989	−	0.083	−
Metric invariance	12.64 (14)	0.982	0.007	0.097	0.014
Scalar invariance	30.29 (28)	0.974	0.008	0.086	0.011
Uniqueness invariance	34.86 (29)	0.970	0.004	0.072	0.014

POCS-L7	M (SD)	AVE	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1) POCs	4.1 (1.8)	0.64		0.23	0.25	0.27	0.41	0.30	0.05	0.18
2) CC	3.8 (1.2)	0.82	0.48^ p < .001 [0.39, 0.57]		0.45	0.50	0.74	0.40	0.00	0.20
3) TC	4.0 (1.2)	0.64	0.50^ p < .001 [0.41, 0.58]	0.67^ p < .001 [0.60, 0.73]		0.53	0.74	0.38	0.01	0.26
4) RC	5.0 (1.1)	0.82	0.52^ p < .001 [0.43, 0.60]	0.71^ p < .001 [0.64, 0.76]	0.73^ p < .001 [0.68, 0.78]		0.83	0.45	0.00	0.30
5) JC	4.4 (0.8)	0.64	0.64^ p < .001 [0.57, 0.70]	0.86^ p < .001 [0.82, 0.89]	0.86^ p < .001 [0.83, 0.89]	0.91^ p < .001 [0.88, 0.92]		0.67	0.00	0.41
6) Eng.	4.4 (0.9)	0.82	0.55^ p < .001 [0.46, 0.62]	0.63^ p < .001 [0.56, 0.70]	0.62^ p < .001 [0.54, 0.69]	0.67^ p < .001 [0.61, 0.73]	0.82^ p < .001 [0.78, 0.86]		0.04	0.55
7) Work.	1.9 (0.6)	0.64	−0.22^ p < .001 [−0.33, −0.11]	0.02 [−0.09, 0.14]	0.08 [−0.03, 0.20]	0.04 [−0.08, 0.15]	0.05 [−0.07, 0.16]	−0.21^ p < .001 [-0.32, −0.10]		0.04
8) OS	4.2 (0.6)	0.82	0.43^ p < .001 [0.33, 0.52]	0.45^ p < .001 [0.35, 0.53]	0.51^ p < .001 [0.42, 0.59]	0.55^ p < .001 [0.47, 0.63]	0.64^ p < .001 [0.57, 0.71]	0.74^ p < .001 [0.69, 0.79]	−0.20^ p < .001 [−0.31, −0.09]
POCS-L5	M (SD)	AVE	1	2	3	4	5	6
1) POCs	3.7 (0.9)	0.81		0.22	0.34	0.19	0.55	0.31
2) CC	3.6 (0.8)	0.75	0.47^ p < .001 [0.38, 0.55]		0.30	0.24	0.45	0.72
3) TC	4.1 (0.7)	0.81	0.58^ p < .001 [0.51, 0.65]	0.55^ p < .001 [0.47, 0.62]		0.18	0.56	.27
4) RC	2.8 (0.6)	0.75	0.44^ p < .001 [0.35, 0.52]	0.49^ p < .001 [0.40, 0.57]	0.42^ p < .001 [0.32, 0.50]		0.41	0.24
5) JC	3.5 (0.5)	0.81	0.74^ p < .001 [0.68, 0.78]	0.85^ p < .001 [0.81, 0.87]	0.75^ p < .001 [0.70, 0.79]	0.64^ p < .001 [0.58, 0.70]		0.79
6) Eng.	5.6 (1.1)	0.75	0.56^ p < .001 [0.48, 0.63]	0.67^ p < .001 [0.61, 0.73]	0.52^ p < .001 [0.44, 0.60]	0.49^ p < .001 [0.40, 0.56]	0.89^ p < .001 [0.87, 0.91]

	1 Discordo totalmente	2 Discordo parcialmente	3 Indiferente	4 Concordo parcialmente	5 Concordo totalmente
1. No meu trabalho tenho a oportunidade de variar o tipo de tarefas que desempenho
2. No meu trabalho tenho a oportunidade de ajustar a quantidade de tarefas que desempenho
3. No meu trabalho eu tenho a oportunidade de modificar a forma como eu interajo com outras pessoas
4. No meu trabalho tenho a oportunidade de assumir novas atividades e desafios
5. No meu trabalho tenho a oportunidade de mudar o significado do meu papel

[1] *Correspondence: rita.pimenta@facamp.com.br; rpimentad@gmail.com

Brasil

Brasil

Perceived Opportunities to Craft Scale: adaptation and evidence of the construct validity of the Brazilian version

Abstract