TY - JOUR
T1 - Structural and Predictive Validity of the Spanish Short Version of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale in Educational Institutions Workers
AU - Santalla-Banderali, Zuleima
AU - Alvarado, Jesús M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
©
PY - 2022/2/24
Y1 - 2022/2/24
N2 - In this paper, we evaluate the factorial validity of the Spanish short version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) and assess its predictive validity with respect to self-assessed work performance. A total of 229 employees from educational institutions in Ecuador participated. Using a model comparison analysis, the unidimensional model exhibited an excellent goodness of fit, χ2 = 26.176 (24), p =.344; CFI =1.000; TLI = 1.000; RMSEA =.020; SRMR =.034; it was not improved by more complex models, Three-factor model: χ2 = 22.148 (21), p =.391; CFI =1.000; TLI = 1.000; RMSEA =.016; SRMR =.033. Two-factor model: χ2 = 26.080 (23), p =.297; CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.000; RMSEA =.025; SRMR =.034). Therefore, it is justified as a unidimensional instrument of work engagement. However, upon analyzing the correlation patterns of the overall score and the work engagement dimensions in relation to the task performance, contextual performance, and counterproductive behaviors, we conclude that, while the unidimensional model exhibits a good fit, the three-factor theoretical approach is substantively superior in that it maintains differential predictive validity for each theoretical dimension.
AB - In this paper, we evaluate the factorial validity of the Spanish short version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) and assess its predictive validity with respect to self-assessed work performance. A total of 229 employees from educational institutions in Ecuador participated. Using a model comparison analysis, the unidimensional model exhibited an excellent goodness of fit, χ2 = 26.176 (24), p =.344; CFI =1.000; TLI = 1.000; RMSEA =.020; SRMR =.034; it was not improved by more complex models, Three-factor model: χ2 = 22.148 (21), p =.391; CFI =1.000; TLI = 1.000; RMSEA =.016; SRMR =.033. Two-factor model: χ2 = 26.080 (23), p =.297; CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.000; RMSEA =.025; SRMR =.034). Therefore, it is justified as a unidimensional instrument of work engagement. However, upon analyzing the correlation patterns of the overall score and the work engagement dimensions in relation to the task performance, contextual performance, and counterproductive behaviors, we conclude that, while the unidimensional model exhibits a good fit, the three-factor theoretical approach is substantively superior in that it maintains differential predictive validity for each theoretical dimension.
KW - UWES-9
KW - Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
KW - construct validity
KW - work engagement
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85125154064
U2 - 10.1017/SJP.2022.6
DO - 10.1017/SJP.2022.6
M3 - Artículo
C2 - 35197137
AN - SCOPUS:85125154064
SN - 1138-7416
VL - 25
JO - Spanish Journal of Psychology
JF - Spanish Journal of Psychology
M1 - e10
ER -