Are you pressed for time and haven’t started working on your assignment yet? Would you like to buy an assignment? Use our custom writing services for better grades. Even if your deadline is approaching fast, our writers can handle your task right when you need it.
Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper
Dr. Frank, please assist me with the attached document if you can? I just need to answer the question.
Thanks in advance
Dr. Frank, please assist me with the attached document if you can? I just need to answer the question. Thanks in advance
How do you plan to prove the validity of your data? Discuss appropriate methodologies to validate your data. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) by Bernard Bass & Bruce J. Avolio has been tested for reliability and validity. Avolio and Bass (2004) revealed the instruments have high and significant convergent validity (.22 < r < .79), and internal consistencies measured by Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .65 to .83. A generally accepted rule is that α of 0.6-0.7 indicates an acceptable level of reliability, and 0.8 or greater is a very good level (Serbetar et al., 2016). The Toxic Leadership Scale was measured for reliability and validity by Schmidt, (2008). Factor analysis reviled strong factor loadings on the five factors demonstrating validity. Additionally, this instrument is reliable, each of the five scales has high reliability (abusive supervision: ɑ=0.93, authoritarian leadership: ɑ=0.89, narcissism: ɑ=0.88, self-promotion: ɑ=0.91, unpredictable leadership: ɑ=0.92). The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) by Culibrk et al. (2018) was tested for validity and reliability. The results of the study by Martins et al. (2012) provided evidence that the MSQ is a valid and reliable scale for the measurement of job satisfaction. Construct validity of the MSQ was explored by factor analysis, which determined the convergent assignment of constructs to items within each of the two subscales (Intrinsic and Extrinsic Satisfaction) of the MSQ. The items show good commonalities and strong factor loadings. The reliability of both subscales was considered good, with Cronbach’s alphas of .87 for intrinsic, α =.78 for extrinsic, and α =.87 for the global scale.