The Young Adults Form of the Attitude toward Women’s Working Scale: Development, Preliminary Validation and Measurement Invariance

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop a scale measuring attitudes toward women’s working. In line with this main purpose, two studies were conducted to develop the tool and investigate its psychometric properties in two different samples. The study 1 started with generating item pool, conducting exploratory factor analysis to identify underlying factor structure of the latent variable. In study 1 after testing the structure of measure, a brief 9-item, tri-factor scale for the assessment of attitudes toward women’s working was emerged. The study 2 utilized a different sample. In study 2, it was aimed to examine model fit, test measurement invariance acroos gender and investigate reliability. Validity and reliability of the scale indicated that the attitude toward women’s working scale (ATWWS) had satisfactory psychometric properties. In study 2, configural and metric invariances of the ATWWS were supported for females and males.

Keywords

• Attitude
• Women’s working
• Scale development
• Configural invariance
• Metric invariance

References

1. Agapiou, A. (2002). Perceptions of gender roles and attitudes toward work among male and female operatives in the Scottish construction industry. Construction Management & Economics, 20(8), 697-705. DOI: 10.1080/0144619021000024989
2. Ajzen, I. (1989). Attitude Structure and Behavior, In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, and A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude Structure and Function, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 241-274.
3. Akın, F. (2002). Kadınların işgücüne katılımı ve işteki durum tercihinin Nested Logit Model ile Analizi [Women's labor force participation and job status preference analysis with Nested Logit Model]. METU/ERC International Conference in Economics VI, Ankara, Turkey, September 2002.
4. Aktaş, G. (2013). Feminist söylemler bağlamında kadın kimliği: Erkek egemen bir toplumda kadın olmak [Female identity in the context of feminist discourses: Being a woman in a male-dominated society]. Journal of Faculty of Letters, 30(1), 53-72.
5. Allport, G.W. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed) Handbook of Social Psychology, Worcester, Mass: Clark University Press.
6. Alwin, D.F., Braun, M., & Scott, J. (1992). The separation of work and the family: Attitudes towards women's labour-force participation in Germany, Great Britain, and the United States. European Sociological Review, 8(1), 13-37. https://www.jstor.org/stable/522315
7. Bianchi, S.M., Milkie, M.A., Sayer, L.C., & Robinson, J.P. (2000). Is Anyone Doing the Homework? Trends in the Gender Division of Household Labor. Social Forces, 79(1), 191-228.
8. Bingöl, O. (2014). Toplumsal cinsiyet olgusu ve Türkiye’de kadınlık [The concept of gender and femininity in Turkey]. KMU Journal of Social and Economic Research, 16(1), 108-114.

9. Blackton, R.R. (1986). A study of the correlation between the degree of acculturation and scholastic achievement and English gain of ESL students, grades 2-5, Beach School, Portland, Oregon. Dissertations and Theses. Paper 3560.
10. Bora, A. (2011). Kadınların sınıfı ücretli ev emeği ve kadın öznelliğinin inşası [Women's class paid home labor and the construction of female subjectivity]. İstanbul: İletişim Publications.
11. Bölükoğlu, A. (2018). Yedek işgücü olarak kadın emeği: Türkiye Örneği:1988-2013 [Women's labor as a reserve labor force: The Case of Turkey]. Journal of Economics, Policy & Finance Research, 3(1), 50-67.
12. Brewe, E., Kramer, L., & O’Brien, G. (2009). Modeling instruction: Positive attitudinal shifts in introductory physics measured with CLASS. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 5(1), 013102.
13. Britton, D.M. (2000). The epistemology of the gendered organization. Gender and Society, 14(3), 418-434.
14. Brown, T. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
15. Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21(2), 230-258.
16. Byrne, B.M. (2004). Testing for multigroup invariance using AMOS graphics: A road less traveled. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(2), 272 300. DOI: 10.1207/ s15328007sem1102_8
17. Chen, F.F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464-504.
18. Chen, F.F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1005-1018.
19. Cheung, G.W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233-255. DOI: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
20. Coltrane, S. (2000). Research on household labor: Modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 1208-1233.
21. Corrigall, E.A., & Konrad, A.M. (2007). Gender role attitudes and careers: A longitudinal study. Sex Roles, 56(11-12), 847-855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9242-0
22. Costello, A., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9.
23. Çiçek, B., & Çopur, Z. (2018). Bireylerin kadınların çalışmasına ve toplumsal cinsiyet rollerine ilişkin tutumları [Attitudes of individuals towards women's work and gender roles]. International Journal of Eurasian Education and Culture, 4, 1-21.
24. Dayioglu, M., & Kirdar, M.G. (2010). Determinants of and trends in labor force participation of women in Turkey (English). Welfare and social policy analytical work program; working paper no. 5. Washington DC: World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/466591468316462301/Determinants-of-and-trends-inlabor-force-participation-of-women-in-Turkey.
25. Dex, S. (1988). Women’s attitudes towards work. Springer.
26. Dimitrov, D.M. (2010). Testing for Factorial Invariance in the Context of Construct Validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43(2) 121–149.
27. Dökmen, Z.Y. (2004). Toplumsal Cinsiyet: Sosyal Psikolojik Açıklamalar [Gender: Social Psychological Explanations]. İstanbul: Sistem Publishing.
28. Erkuş, A. (2012). Varolan ölçek geliştirme yöntemleri ve ölçme kuramları psikolojik ölçek geliştirmede ne kadar işlevsel: Yeni bir öneri [Existing scale development methods and measurement theories how functional are psychological scale development: A new proposal]. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3(2), 279-290.
29. Ersoy, E. (2009). Cinsiyet kültürü içerisinde kadın ve erkek kimliği: Malatya Örneği [Male and female identity in gender culture: Malatya Case]. Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences,19(2), 209-230.
30. Fabrigar, L.R., MacDonald, T. K., & Wegener, D. T. (2005). The Structure of attitudes from: The Handbook of Attitudes Routledge. Accessed on: 21 May 2019. https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781410612823.ch3
31. Fabrigar, L. R. & Wegener, D. T. (2010). Attitude structure. Em R. F. Baumeister & E. J. Finkel (Orgs.), Advanced social psychology: The state of the science (pp. 177-216). New York: Oxford University Press.
32. Ferrao, V. (2010). Paid work. Women in Canada: A Gender-Based Statistical Report. Sixth edition. Statistics Canada. Catalogue 89-503X.
33. Forsythe, N., Korzeniewicz, R.P., & Durrant, V. (2000). Gender inequalities and economic growth: A longitudinal evaluation. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 48(3), 573-617. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/452611.
34. Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C, & Paris, A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
35. GGGR (2018). https://www.weforum.org
36. Glasman, L.R., & Albarracín, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 778–822.
37. Gubernskaya, Z. (2010). Changing attitudes toward marriage and children in six countries. Sociological Perspectives, 53, 179-200.
38. Gürler, Ö., & Üçdoruk, Ş. (2007). Türkiye’de cinsiyete göre gelir farklılığının ayrıştırma yöntemiyle uygulanması [Applying the decomposition method of income differences by gender in Turkey]. Journal of Yasar University, 2(6), 571-589.
39. Heilman, M.E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 657-674.
40. Hersch, J., & Stratton, L. (2002). Housework and Wages. The Journal of Human Resources, 37(1), 217-229. DOI:10.2307/3069609
41. Himmelweit, S. (2002). Making visible the hidden economy: The case for gender-impact analysis of economic policy. Feminist Economics, 8(1), 49-70. DOI: 10.1080/13545700110104864
42. Hinner, M.B. (2019). The cultural perspective of mergers & acquisitions: An exploratory study. In J. Stumpf-Wollersheim & A. Horsch (Eds.), Forum mergers & acquisitions. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
43. Kakıcı, H., Emeç, H., & Üçdoğruk, Ş. (2007). Türkiye’de çalışan kadınların çocuk bakım tercihleri [Child care preferences of working women in Turkey]. Istanbul University Faculty of Economics Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, 5, 20-40.
44. Kaufman, G., & Uhlenberg, P. (2000). The Influence of Parenthood on the Work Effort of Married Men and Women. Social Forces, 78(3), 931-947. DOI:10.2307/3005936
45. Kılıç, D., & Öztürk, S. (2014). Türkiye’de kadınların işgücüne katılımı önündeki engeller ve çözüm yolları: Bir ampirik uygulama [Barriers to women's labor force participation and solutions in Turkey: An empirical application]. Journal of Public Administration,47(1), 107-130.
46. Kıral, G., & Karlılar, S. (2017). Türkiye’de kadın işgücüne katılımını etkileyen faktörler: Adana ili üzerine bir uygulama [Factors affecting the labor force participation of women in Turkey: Adana province on an application]. Journal of Çukurova University Institute of Social Sciences, 26(3), 272-286.
47. Kırkpınar, L. (2001). Türkiye’de toplumsal değişme ve kadın [Social change and women in Turkey]. Ankara: Ministry of Culture Publications.
48. Kızılırmak, A.B. (2005). Labor market participation decisions of married women: Evidence from Turkey. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
49. Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
50. Koca, C., Arslan, B., & Aşçı, F.H. (2011). Attitudes towards women's work roles and women managers in a sports organization: The case of Turkey. Gender, Work & Organization, 18(6), 592-612. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00490.x
51. Koray, M. (1992). Çalışma yaşamında kadın gerçekleri [Woman facts in working life]. Journal of Public Administration, 25(1),93-122
52. Köseoğlu, S. (2017). Erkek üniversite öğrencilerinin kadınların çalışmasına yönelik tutum ölçeği [The attitude scale of male university students towards the work of women]. TBB Journal, 30, 303-312.
53. Kuzgun, Y., & Sevim S.A. (2004). Kadınların çalışmasına karşı tutum ve dini yönelim arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between attitude towards women's work and religious orientation]. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 37(1), 14-27.
54. Lips, H.M. (2001). Sex and Gender: An Introduction. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
55. Lubke, G.H., & Muthén, B.O. (2004) Applying multigroup confirmatory factor models for continuous outcomes to likert scale data complicates meaningful group comparisons. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11(4), 514-534. DOI: 10.1207/s15328007sem1104_2
56. Maio, G.R., Haddock, G., & Verplanken, B. (2018). The psychology of attitudes and attitude change. Sage Publications Limited.
57. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from per- sons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
58. MLSSF (2014). Analysis of the female labor force profiles and statistics in Turkey. http://kadininstatusu.aile.gov.tr/
59. Morin, A.J.S., Arens A.K., & Marsh, H.W. (2016). A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct- relevant psychometric multidimensionality. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23,116–39.
60. Negiz, N., & Yemen, A. (2011). Kamu örgütlerinde kadın yöneticiler: Yönetici ve çalışan açısından yönetimde kadın sorunsalı [Women executives in public organizations: Women's problem in management in terms of managers and employees]. SDU Faculty of Arts and Sciences Journal of Social Sciences, 24, 195-214.
61. Noor, A.M., & Saad, R.A.J. (2016). The mediating effect of trust on the relationship between attitude and perceived service quality towards compliance behavior of zakah. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(7S), 27-31. available online at: www.econjournals.com
62. Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
63. OECD (2016). Labor force statistics: Labor force participation rate. www.oecd/data
64. Özar, Ş. (2005). GAP Bölgesi’nde kadın girişimciliği [Women entrepreneurship in the GAP Region]. Ankara, GAP-GİDEM Publications, January.
65. Özçatal, E.Ö. (2011). Ataerkillik, toplumsal cinsiyet ve kadının çalışma yaşamına katılımı [Patriarchy, gender and women's participation in working life]. Çankırı Karatekin University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 1(1), 21-39.
66. Özkaplan, N. (2013). Kadın akademisyenler: Cam tavanlar hâlâ çok kalın! [Female academics: Glass ceilings are still too thick!]. Journal of Women's Studies,12(1), 1-23.
67. Palaz, S. (2015). The reasons for women’s labor force non-participation: Empirical evidence from Bandırma. Journal of Management and Economics Research,13(3), 435-449.
68. Perkins, K. K., Adams, W.K., Pollock, S.J., Finkelstein, N.D., & Wieman, C.E. (2005). Correlating student beliefs with student learning using the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey. In AIP Conference Proceedings, 790(1), 61-64.
69. Powell, A. (2019). Women and the Economy. Briefing paper. Number CBP06838.
70. Rentz, J.O., Shepherd, C. D., Tashchian, A., Dabholkar, P.A., & Ladd, R.T. (2002). A measure of selling skill: Scale development and validation. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 22(1), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2002.10754289
71. Riordan, C. M., & Vandenberg, R. J. (1994). A central question in cross-cultural research: Do employees of different cultures interpret work-related measures in an equivalent manner. Journal of Management, 20, 643-671.
72. Scott, J. & Clery, E. (2013). Gender roles: An incomplete revolution? In Park, A., Bryson, C., Clery, E., Curtice, J. and Phillips, M. (Eds.) (2013), British Social Attitudes: the 30th Report, London: NatCen Social Research. Available online at: www.bsa-30.natcen.ac.uk
73. Şengül, S., & Kıral, G. (2006). Türkiye’de kadının işgücü pazarına katılım ve doğurganlık kararları [Participation of women in the labor market and fertility decisions in Turkey]. Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 20(1), 89-99.
74. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
75. Tan, M. (2000). Eğitimde kadın-erkek eşitliği ve Türkiye gerçeği. Kadın-Erkek Eşitliğine Doğru Yürüyüş-Eğitim, Çalışma Yaşamı ve Siyaset içinde. [Gender equality and the reality of Turkey in education. Walking towards equality between men and women-in education, working life and politics]. Ankara: TÜSİAD Publications.
76. Tansel, A. (2002). Economic development and female labor force participation in Turkey: Time series evidence and cross-province estimates. Economic Research Center Working Paper in Economics, 1(5), 1-37.
77. TUIK (2016). Labor force statistics: 2007-2016. http://www.tuik.gov.tr
78. TUIK (1990). http://www.tuik.gov.tr
79. TUIK (2000). http://www.tuik.gov.tr
80. UN (2012). United Nations. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2012. Retrieved August 17, 2019, https://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/MDG%20Report%202012.pdf
81. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019). Retrieved September 3, 2019, from https://statusofwomendata.org/explore-the-data/employment-and-earnings/
82. Vandenberg, R.J., & Lance, C.E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4-70.
83. Weston, R., Gore Jr, P. A., Chan, F., & Catalano, D. (2008). An introduction to using structural equation models in rehabilitation psychology. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(3), 340-356. DOI: 10.1037/a0013039
84. Worthington, R., & Whittaker, T. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. Counseling Psychologist, 34, 806-838.
85. Yamak, R., Abdioğlu, Z., & Mert, N. (2012). Türkiye’de işgücüne katılımı belirleyen faktörler: Mikro ekonomik analiz [Determinants of labor force participation in Turkey: Micro-economic analysis]. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 12(2), 41-58.
86. Yıldırım, K., & Doğrul, G. (2008). Çalışmak ya da Çalışmamak: Türkiye’de Kentsel Alanlarda Yaşayan Kadınların İşgücüne Katılmama Kararlarının Olası Belirleyicileri [Work or not work: Possible Determinants of Women Living in Urban Areas in Turkey's decision not to participate in the labor force]. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1), 239-262.
87. Yinger, R.J. (1980). Can we really teach them to think? In R. E. Young (Ed.), Fostering critical thinking. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc
88. Yuan, K. H. (2005). Fit statistics versus test statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 115–148.