User talk:Angelaxia

From Yochai Benkler - Wealth of Networks
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Variables Specific Questions Scale Reliability (Cronbach Alpha) Reference Level of expertise (for self-assessment as well as for supervisor rating) Including five dimensions of professional-expertise: knowledge, meta-cognitive knowledge, skills, social recognition, growth and flexibility (12-19 items) each. E.g., The Knowledge Dimension 

  1. I have ... (very little--a very great deal of) ... factual or specialist knowledge in my job domain.
  2. During that period, I ... (never--very often) ... introduced ideas or suggestions that resulted in an increase in productivity.
  3.  During that period, I devoted ... (very little--a very great deal of) ... time to consultations with colleagues outside the organisation who were also working in my job domain.
  4. I consider myself ... (not at all--extremely) ... competent to engage in in-depth, specialist, discussions in the domain of my work.
  5. In situations where I have not achieved my goal and not managed to solve a problem satisfactory, I ... (never--very often) ... become discouraged. (Reversed scoring for this item.)
  6. In general, ... (very little--a very great deal of) ... value is attached to what I say.
  7. I consider myself ... (not at all--extremely) ... competent to be of practical assistance to colleagues with factual or specialist questions.
  8. I consider myself ... (not at all--extremely) ... competent to provide information regarding my work in a way that is comprehensible.
  9. During that period, I ... (never--very often) ... offered to help other people to get hold of the necessary information.
 10. I consider myself ... (not at all--to a considerable degree) ... competent to be of practical assistance to colleagues with questions about how to approach the work.
 11. My array of strategies on how to approach the work would appear to be ... (not at all--very often) ... out of date, in view of current developments. (Reversed scoring for this item.)
 12. My superior ... (never--very often) ... turns to me for advice on factual or specialist questions, which concern my domain of work.
 13. I am ... (not at all--extremely) ... up to date with the latest developments in everything that concerns my job.
 14. In view of current developments, I consider my actual or specialist knowledge to be ... (not at all--to a considerable degree) ... out of date. (Reversed scoring for this item.)
 15. I consider myself to be ... (not at all--extremely) ... competent to utilise colleagues' suggestions and ideas in my work.
 16. I think that I possess ... (very little--a very great deal of) ... knowledge that I am able to apply in related areas in new, unfamiliar situations.
 17. I am ... (not at all--extremely) ... competent to make prompt decisions with respect to my work.	.83-.94	Van Der Heijden, B. I. J. M. (2000). The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of a Multidimensional Measurement Instrument of Professional Expertise. High Ability Studies, 11(1), 9-39.

Level of expertise (perceived expertise) Expertise as one of the three dimensions of the Source-credibility scale (either in semantic differential scale or Likert scale) Expert-not an expert Experiences-Inexperienced Knowledgeable-Unknowledgeable Qualified-Unqualified Skilled-Unskilled .885 Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers' perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39. Proficiency in using communication technology Appendix: Measures of Internet self-efficacy 1. I feel confident browsing the World Wide Web (WWW). 2. I feel confident chatting on the Internet. 3. I feel confident surfing the World Wide Web (WWW). 4. I feel confident encrypting my e-mail messages. 5. I feel confident encrypting my e-mail messages before sending them over the Internet. 6. I feel confident encrypting my e-mail messages that I send. 7. I feel confident decrypting e-mail messages that I receive. 8. I feel confident decrypting e-mail messages. 9. I feel confident decrypting my e-mail messages. 10. I feel confident creating a home page for the World Wide Web (WWW). 11. I feel confident making changes on a home page. 12. I feel confident downloading from another computer. 13. I feel confident scanning pictures to save on the computer. 14. I feel confident sending a fax via the computer. 15. I feel confident receiving a fax on my computer. 16. I feel confident recovering a file I accidentally deleted. 17. I feel confident editing (size, colour) a scanned picture. .90 Torkzadeh, G., & Van Dyke, T. P. (2001). Development and validation of an Internet self-efficacy scale. Behavior & Information Technology, 20(4), 275-280. Computer use efficiency assessment (online part) Bradlow, E. T. (2002). An Assessment of Basic Computer Proficiency Among Active Internet Users: Test Construction, Calibration, Antecedents, and Consequences. Journal of Educational Statistics, 27(3), 237.

Trust in interpersonal relations .91




.89 McAllister, D. (1995). Affect-and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59.

Trust in technology Participants are asked to make judgments about 25 technologies (perceived risks, perceived benefits, trust and knowledge). Trust: In general, how much confidence do you have in the authorities regulating the following items (1, no confidence at all; 7, high confidence) N/A Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G. (2000). Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge. Risk Analysis, 20(5), 713-720. How much trust do you have in the following institutions or persons that they are conscious of their responsibilities in doing genetic engineering or handling the modified products? (1:no trust at all; 5: very high trust) Scientists and researchers at universities Pharmaceutical companies Agricultural companies Food companies N/A Siegrist, M. (2000). The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology. Risk Analysis, 20(2), 195-204. I feel confident that the British government adequately regulates GM food I am confident that the development of GM crops is being carefully Regulated (Both statements were answered on a 5- point scale from 1: “totally disagree” to 5: “totally agree) .69 Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2005). Trust in risk regulation: Cause or consequence of the acceptability of GM food? Risk Analysis, 25(1), 199-209. Perceived source expertise was measured by six items adapted from Frewer et al. (1996), including (SE1) “Information about food-related hazards from SOURCE is trustworthy,” (SE2) “Information about food-related hazards from SOURCE is accurate,” (SE3) “Information about food-related hazards from SOURCEis factual,” (SE4) “TheSOURCEis knowledgeable about food-related hazards,” 

(SE5) “The

SOURCEfeels a responsibility to provide good foodrelated information to the public,” and 

(SE6) “The SOURCE has a good track record of providing information

about food-related hazards.”

Perceived source trustworthiness was measured by another four items adapted from Frewer et al. (1996), including (ST1) “The SOURCE is likely to withhold information about food-related issues from the public,” (ST2) “Information about foodrelated hazards from SOURCE is distorted,” (ST3) “Information about food-related hazards from the SOURCE has been proven wrong in the past,” and (ST4) “The SOURCE provides accurate information about food-related hazards only to protect themselves and their own interests.” (Seven point scales ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (7) Frewer, L. J., Scholderer, J., & Bredahl, L. (2003). Communication about the risks and benefits of genetically modified foods: The mediating role of trust. Risk Analysis, 23(6), 1117-1133. Success about knowledge transfer Ease of knowledge transfer It would be easy for me to explain to this person a key idea, concept, or theory in my area of expertise. This person’s expertise makes it easy for me to explain a key idea, concept, or theory in my area of expertise. Anyone in my area of expertise can explain easily to this person a key idea, concept, or theory in our area. I can explain easily to anyone in this person’s area of expertise a key idea, concept, or theory in my area. It would be easy for me to explain to this person new developments in my area of expertise. (7-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.)

.87 Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240-247.

In the period 1986-1991, has your unit actively transferred locally developed technological know-how to other manufacturing or R&D units in your company? No; Yes, to units in Sweden on ___number of occasions; yes, to units outside Sweden on ___number of occasions. In the period 1986-1991 has your unit received by the same means as above technological know-how developed in other R&D units in your company? No; Yes, from units in Sweden on ___number of occasions; yes, from units outside Sweden on ___number of occasions. .75 Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. (1999). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3), 439-452.

Retrieved from "http://cyber.harvard.edu/wealth_of_networks/?title=User_talk:Angelaxia&oldid=2258"