- Volume 13 Number 1 ( Feb. 2023)
- Volume 13 Number 2 ( April. 2023)
- Volume 13 Number 3 (Jun. 2023)
- Volume 13 Number 4 (Aug. 2023)
- Volume 13 Number 5 ( Oct. 2023)
- Volume 13 Number 6 ( Dec. 2023)
- Volume 12 Number 1 ( Feb. 2022)
- Volume 12 Number 2 ( May. 2022)
- Volume 12 Number 3 (Aug. 2022)
- Volume 12 Number 4 ( Nov. 2022)
- Volume 11 Number 1 ( Feb. 2021)
- Volume 11 Number 2 ( May. 2021)
- Volume 11 Number 3 (Aug. 2021)
- Volume 11 Number 4 ( Nov. 2021)
- Volume 10 Number 1 ( Feb. 2020)
- Volume 10 Number 2 ( May. 2020)
- Volume 10 Number 3 (Aug. 2020)
- Volume 10 Number 4 ( Nov. 2020)
- Volume 9 Number 1 ( Feb. 2019)
- Volume 9 Number 2 ( May. 2019)
- Volume 9 Number 3 ( Aug. 2019)
- Volume 9 Number 4 ( Nov. 2019)
- Volume 8 Number 1 ( Jan. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 2 (Feb. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 3 (Mar. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 4 (Apr. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 5 (May. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 6 (Jun. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 7 (Jul. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 8 (Aug. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 9 (Sep. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 10 (Oct. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 11 (Nov. 2018)
- Volume 8 Number 12 (Dec. 2018)
- Volume 7 Number 1 (Jan. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 2 (Feb. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 3 (Mar. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 4 (April. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 5 (May. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 6 (Jun. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 7 (Jul. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 8 (Aug. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 9 (Sep. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 10 ( Oct. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 11 ( Nov. 2017)
- Volume 7 Number 12 ( Dec. 2017)
- Volume 6 Number 1 (Jan. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 2 (Feb. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 3 (Mar. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 4 (Apr. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 5 (May 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 6 (Jun. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 7 (Jul. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 8 (Aug. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 9 (Sep. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 10 (Oct. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 11 (Nov. 2016)
- Volume 6 Number 12 (Dec. 2016)
- Volume 5 Number 1 (Jan. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 2 (Feb. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 3 (Mar. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 4 (Apr. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 5 (May 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 6 (Jun. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 7 (Jul. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 8 (Aug. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 9 (Sep. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 10 (Oct. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 11 (Nov. 2015)
- Volume 5 Number 12 (Dec. 2015)
- Volume 4 Number 1 (Jan. 2014)
- Volume 4 Number 2 (Mar. 2014)
- Volume 4 Number 3 (May 2014)
- Volume 4 Number 4 (Jul. 2014)
- Volume 4 Number 5 (Sep. 2014)
- Volume 4 Number 6 (Nov. 2014)
- Volume 3 Number 1 (Jan. 2013)
- Volume 3 Number 2 (Mar. 2013)
- Volume 3 Number 3 (May 2013)
- Volume 3 Number 4 (Jul. 2013)
- Volume 3 Number 5 (Sep. 2013)
- Volume 3 Number 6 (Nov. 2013)
- Volume 2 Number 1 (Jan. 2012)
- Volume 2 Number 2 (Mar. 2012)
- Volume 2 Number 3 (May 2012)
- Volume 2 Number 4 (Jul. 2012)
- Volume 2 Number 5 (Sep. 2012)
- Volume 2 Number 6 (Nov. 2012)
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
- ISSN: 2010-3646 (Online)
- Abbreviated Title: Int. J. Social. Scienc. Humanit.
- Frequency: Bimonthly
- DOI: 10.18178/IJSSH
- Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Paul Sudnik
- Executive Editor: Ms. Yoyo Y. Zhou
- Abstracting/ Indexing: Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Crossref, Electronic Journals Library
- E-mail: ijssh.editorial.office@gmail.com
Home> Archive> 2015> Volume 5 Number 5 (May 2015)
IJSSH 2015 Vol.5(5): 413-417 ISSN: 2010-3646
DOI: 10.7763/IJSSH.2015.V5.491
DOI: 10.7763/IJSSH.2015.V5.491
Interpersonal Citizenship Motivation: A Rating Scale Validity of Rasch Model Measurement
Shereen Noranee, Noormala Amir Ishak, Raja Munirah Raja Mustapha, Rozilah Abdul Aziz, and Rohana Mat Som
Abstract—This paper investigated empirically the utility of
rating scales in the development of high-quality measures. The
present study utilized the Rasch rating scale model to examine
and reassess the psychometric properties of the adapted
Interpersonal Citizenship Motivation scales. It was argued that
interpersonal citizenship behaviour (ICB) could be driven by
prosocial motivation and impression management (IMM)
motivation. ICB is commonly viewed as prosocial behavior, not
impression management. However, a process by which
employees are either motivated intrinsically or extrinsically,
plays an important role in interpersonal behavior. As ICB was
claimed to be more overt and visible than organizational
citizenship behavior, the mediation of leader-member exchange
quality may increase the likelihood of being more friendly and
offering help among IM-oriented employees. The observed
measures of the pilot study suggested a violation pattern,
indicating a lack of monotonicity in the average measures of
Interpersonal Citizenship Motivation scale. Hence, collapsing
categories was recommended to create a more uniform
frequency distribution. This paper aims to validate the rating
scale that yields the highest quality measures for the construct
of interest. The WINSTEPS software provides a wide variety of
output formats that are virtually indispensable for investigating
rating scale quality.
Index Terms—Rating scale validity, Rasch measurement model, interpersonal citizenship behavior, employee motivation.
Shereen Noranee is with the Universiti Teknologi Mara (e-mail: shereen@puncakalam.uitm.edu.my).
Index Terms—Rating scale validity, Rasch measurement model, interpersonal citizenship behavior, employee motivation.
Shereen Noranee is with the Universiti Teknologi Mara (e-mail: shereen@puncakalam.uitm.edu.my).
Cite: Shereen Noranee, Noormala Amir Ishak, Raja Munirah Raja Mustapha, Rozilah Abdul Aziz, and Rohana Mat Som, " Interpersonal Citizenship Motivation: A Rating Scale Validity of Rasch Model Measurement," International Journal of Social Science and Humanity vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 413-417, 2015.