An item-level investigation of conceptual and empirical distinctiveness of proactivity constructs

Seonghee Cho, Nichelle C. Carpenter, Bo Zhang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Beyond the prior investigations that took scale-level approaches to determining discriminant validity in proactivity constructs, the current study contributes a much-needed interrogation of the items used to measure the behaviors in this domain. The substantive validity (SV) assessments (Study 1) showed that many of the items were judged to be inconsistent with the definition of the construct they assess or, alternatively, more consistent with the definition of a different construct in the domain. Further, exploratory factor analysis revealed the difficulty in empirically separating the four behaviors, while BiM results also advocated against the unique variance of them after accounting for a general factor (Study 2). Altogether, our results show that the items are partly to blame for the empirical redundancy issue.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)337-350
Number of pages14
JournalInternational Journal of Selection and Assessment
Issue number3
StatePublished - Sep 2020
Externally publishedYes


  • bifactor modeling (BiM)
  • construct redundancy
  • item overlap
  • proactivity construct
  • substantive validity (SV)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Business, Management and Accounting
  • Applied Psychology
  • General Psychology
  • Strategy and Management
  • Management of Technology and Innovation


Dive into the research topics of 'An item-level investigation of conceptual and empirical distinctiveness of proactivity constructs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this