How fatigued do you currently feel? Convergent and discriminant validity of a single-item fatigue measure

Contains fulltext : 56229.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)How Fatigued Do You Currently Feel? Convergent and Discriminant Validity of a Single-Item Fatigue Measure: Madelon L.M. VAN HOOFF, et al. Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands-The main aim of this study was to establish the convergent and discriminant validity of a single-item measure of daily fatigue ("How fatigued do you currently feel?") in a daily diary context. Convergent validity of our measure was examined by relating it to a validated multiple-item measure of fatigue (Profile of Mood States; McNair, Lorr, & Droppelman, 1971) and to other daily (work-home interference, sleep complaints, work-related effort) and global (fatigue, health complaints, work-home interference, job pressure) measures that are conceptually related to fatigue. Discriminant validity was assessed by relating the single-item fatigue measure to daily (work pleasure) and global (job control, social support, motivation to learn) measures that are conceptually distinct from fatigue. Data were collected among 120 academic staff members, who completed a general questionnaire (tapping the global measures under study) and who took part in a 9-d daily diary study (3 measurements daily). Correlation patterns and multilevel analyses revealed strong and significant associations between the single-item fatigue measure and the variables incorporated to assess convergent validity (especially with the POMS: r=0.80), thus supporting the convergent validity of our measure. Relations with variables included to examine discriminant validity were weak or insignificant, supporting the discriminant validity of the single-item fatigue measure. Despite this study's limitations (i.e., exclusive use of self-reporting, specific sample) we conclude that this single-item fatigue measure offers a valid way to assess daily fatigue.11 p

A measurement perspective on affirmative action in U.S. medical education

Background: The U.S. Supreme Court has recently heard another affirmative action case, and similar programs to promote equitable representation in higher education are being debated and enacted around the world. Understanding the empirical and quantitative research conducted over the last 50 years is important in designing effective and fair initiatives related to affirmative action in medical education. Unfortunately, the quantitative measurement research relevant to affirmative action is poorly documented in the scholarly journals that serve medical education. Methods: This research organizes and documents the measurement literature relevant to enacting affirmative action within the medical school environment, and should be valuable for informing future actions. It provides summaries of those areas where the research evidence is strong and highlights areas where more research evidence is needed. To structure the presentation, 10 topic areas are identified in the form of research questions. Results: Measurement evidence related to these questions is reviewed and summarized to provide evidence-based answers. Conclusions: These answers should provide a useful foundation for making important decisions regarding the use of racial diversity initiatives in medical education