the belief in equality inventory and leadership behavior: a construct validation

The Belief in Equality Inventory and Leadership Behavior: A Construct Validation

DAVID B. G u y 1 SHEILA CONNOR Westminster College Eckerd Family Youth Alternatives, Inc.

Concord, NH

MICHAEL DECATUR Ingersoll- Rand

Nashua. MH

The belief-in-equality construct is defined as the belief that general ability and potential are widely distributed throughout the human population, rather than being limited to an elite minority. Data from a 21-item belief-in-equality inventory and from two construct-validation tasks were gathered using a liberal-arts undergraduate sample of 201 students. Of the two validation tasks, one indicated strong construct validity (p < .015), however, the second one produced correctly patterned but insignificant results. The results showed that leaders with a high belief in equality put more funds into training their subordinates and had a tendency to delegate more authority to them than leaders with a weak belief in equality.

Belief in equality is proposed as an attitudinal construct that general ability and potential are widely distributed throughout the population. Ability is not limited to a small, elite minority. Rather, it is a belief that most people have the potential to contribute a great deal to their social, work, and civic settings. Barring the small percentage of severely organically retarded, and including the great masses which may appear on the surface frequently to have little or perhaps only modest promise, this is the belief that extant and untapped ability are pervasive. This belief certainly need not deny the reality of brilliance and rare giftedness on the part of a small minority.

Even though this research is focused on a belief construct which would not necessarily have to have factual reality in order to influence behavior, the construct seems to harmonize well with current evidence and theory about intelligence and human abilities. The optimism of the equality construct is manifested in current conceptions of adult developmental intelligence as being generously plural, multifaceted, and plastic (Guilford, 1959; Sternberg, 1985).

'Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David B. Gray, Department of Psychology, Westminster College, New Wilmington, PA 16172-0001.

367

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1994, 24, 4, pp. 367-377. Copyright 0 1994 by V. H. Winston L? Son, Inc. All rights reserved.

368 GRAY, CONNOR, AND DECATUR

The content of this construct counters the overall dim view of humanity as suggested by the Machiavellian (Christie & Geis, 1970) and authoritarian (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950) personality syn- dromes. The conformity literature suggests that under the circumstances of serious threat, ignorance, and ambiguity, most people are partially vulnerable to either surface compliance or even internal submission and eventual attitude change (Campbell, Tesser, & Fairey, 1986). People at the higher end of traditionally measured intelligence seem to resist better, but unidimensionally measured intelligence only explains about one-quarter of the variance of compliance (Crutchfield, 1955). In other words, even though the majority are often vulnerable to being duped and blindly led astray by a powerful figure, this one particular weakness does not undermine the more optimistic belief in equality, nor should the equality belief be viewed as veering in the extreme opposite direction of embracing the romantic goodness of humankind. Humans may be open to being duped, and they may use their talent for good or ill, but the question is, What is the effect of believing that people have ability- developed and undeveloped?

The belief in equality may explain a portion of why leaders opt for an autocratic or democratic approach. Autocratic leaders apparently assume they are superior to their subordinates, and thus place their workers in centralized structures which, in turn, convey passive and low-status roles (rather than equal status). Democratic leaders apparently assume a functional equality with their subordinates, and thus place them in decentralized structures which inherently convey active and equal-status functional roles (Shaw, 1978).

The trend in organizations to shift from autocratic leadership and centralized structures to democratic leadership and decentralized structures may be partially related to a growing belief in equality. Quality circles in Japan, partici- pative management in this country, and codetermination in Germany are examples of this shift. Dissemination of the idea of equality has been docu- mented in the behavioral literature for several decades (Argyris, 1962; Blake & McCanse, 1991; Blake & Mouton, 1964; Deming, 1986; Likert, 1967; McGregor, 1960). Perhaps McGregor (1960) was the most explicit in describ- ing the equality belief and showing its importance. Notice the close parallel between at least two of McGregor’s five democratic leadership assumptions (Theory Y) and the current construct of equality proposed in this paper. Problem-solving ability is present in a larger segment of the population (compared to what current practices suggest). Business does not use the full potential of its people (McGregor, 1960, p. 48, paraphrased).

The importance of this construct to conflict reduction and social categoriza- tion theory is substantial. A critical criterion of group success, according to that

EQUALITY INVENTORY 369

body of theory, is that group members are assigned equal-status work roles, even though their formal status may vary greatly. This is accomplished by all members being given essentially equal task resources and opportunities to contribute to high-quality group goals. In other words, productive teams are only realized when the ground rules indicate that all members are permitted and encouraged to act as functional equals (Miller & Brewer, 1984; Turner & Giles, 1981). A leader is more likely to treat group members equally if he or she believes that potential ability is widespread and that all the group members are therefore valuable.

The extensive work on equality (Inglehart, 1985; Rokeach, 1974; Rokeach & Ball-Rokeach, 1989) is conceptually different than the new construct being tested here. The Rokeach construct focused on equal opportunity, not ability. However, opportunity for all is an important implication or outcome of the new construct; in this study, construct-validation tasks will focus on training and providing growth opportunities for all. A belief in widespread ability or potential justifies making widespread opportunities available.

The other known attempt to measure equality was conducted by Bales and Couch (1969). Only 3 of their 10 subscale items on equality were appropriate in content to fit into the current construct.

The purpose of this research is to test further for the construct validity (Cronbach, 1989) of the Belief in Equality (BE) Inventory. Groundwork for this investigation was begun by Connor (1989). Connor constructed a 21- item Belief in Equality Inventory (Appendix) and two construct-validation tasks. Construct validation was begun by using tasks in a simulated work setting. The two tasks focused on providing opportunities for greater profes- sional growth and responsibility. If one has a strong belief in equality as defined above (widespread ability and potential), then one should invest more in training his or her subordinates, and one should entrust more projects of substantial responsibility to them. In a preliminary test of this hypothesis, Connor (1989) found support for the equality-training linkage, but not for the equality-delegation linkage.

Method

Subjects

Two hundred and one undergraduate students from a northeastern liberal-arts college enrolled in Introductory Psychology completed the study for extra credit. Participants were largely first- and second-year students with a small minority of upper-class students being represented. Males and females were about equal in number.


Design

The study used a 2 x 2 mixed factorial design. The first independent variable was Equality at two levels (measured by the BE inventory with scores split at the median) and thus treated as an experimental variable. The second independent variable was composed of the two construct-validation tasks (training and delegation).

Materials

Subjects responded to the following instruments-the 2 1 -item BE Inventory, two construct-validation tasks (training and delegation), and 19 select items from the Adorno (1 950) F scale.

The 21-item BE scale was constructed under the initiative of Connor (1989). It contained three items by Bales and Couch (1969) and 18 items written by Connor and her senior-study undergraduate adviser. An example of the Bales and Couch (1969, p. 16) items was, “A group of equals will work a lot better than a group with a rigid hierarchy.” The other 18 items were written intuitively, and all are presented in the Appendix. Six items were written negatively to help break up response bias. Five-point Likert-type scales were used.

In both of the validation tasks, the subject assumed the role of a manger of a small branch office. In the training task, the manager had an excess in the budget at the end of the year of $8,000. The manager was authorized to spend this money either in redoing some of the offices or sending his or her workers for additional training in teamwork techniques. The subject could respond in any combination of ways of spending the money. The second task was to probe for the willingness to delegate and pass authority to subordinates. The manager was pressed for time and had eight projects which possibly could be delegated, each worth a similar value of about $1,000. The manager could delegate none or any number of projects up to eight to a subordinate. These two tasks are called training (or budgeting) and delegating.

The F scale was included because it taps, to some extent, the converse of equality, that is, anti-democratic notions.

Procedure

Participants completed the experimental booklet at one sitting, one person at a time, in the same laboratory room. Responses were totally anonymous. Prior consent forms were used, and debriefing was included.


Results

Equality Inventoly Descriptive Statistics

The 21-item inventory used 5-point response scales; 1 was strongly agree, therefore, low scores represented high levels of belief in equality. The mini- mum score possible was 21, and the maximum was 105. Obtained scores ranged from 24 to 74. The 50 percentile split point was 40.5, and the mean was 40.8.

Reliability Analysis

Item-total correlations ranged from a low of .10 to a high of .58; 18 of these correlations were significant at the .01 level of confidence, 2 at the .05 level, and only one failed to reach significance at the .05 level (df= 198). Cronbach’s (1951) Alpha was .76. This was judged to represent substantial internal consistency and an estimate of acceptable stability. Test-retest data were not gathered.

Construct- Validity Analysis

Since the equality inventory manifested substantial internal consistency, the 2 1 items were treated as one variable, scored, and split at the median and with high scores representing low belief in equality. This variable was then compared orthogonally in an analysis of variance to the two validation tasks. The dependent scales (range of 0-8) on the two validation tasks.

For the 9-point task-performance scales, the cell means were: training task- high equality, 5.45; training task-low equality, 4.85; delegating task-high equality, 4.2 1; and delegating task-low equality, 4.08. The main effect for tasks was significant, F( 1, 188) = 5 1.9, p < .OO I. Likewise, the equality main effect was significant, F( 1, 188) = 6.55, p < .01. The interaction was not significant. The only statistic which is relevant here to construct validation is the highly significant main effect for equality; individual comparison t tests indicated that the high- and low-equality groups were only significantly different on the training task, t(198) = 2.45, p < .015. Delegating task results was in the right direction, but not significant (Figure 1).

One piece of indirect support for construct validity was the significant negative correlation with a select portion of the authoritarian F scale. The F data were only available for 37 of the 201 subjects. The correlation was r(35) = -.36, p < .05; the square of the coefficient suggests a 13% overlap between the two measures.


Y)

5.0

0

e!

F

4.0

3.5 Budgeting Task Delegating Task

TYPES OF TASKS

Figure 1. Task response for two types of tasks for high- and low-equality groups.

Multidimensionality of the Belief in Equality hventory

Even though the Alpha of .76 indicates considerable evidence for the unidi- mensionality of the measure, its relative moderate magnitude warranted further examination and probing for multidimensionality. The cluster subroutine from SPSS was used for this analysis. The structural analysis is very preliminary, but three unambiguous cleavages occurred in the icicle plot, suggesting a four-factor solution. The results of the cluster analysis appear in Figure 2 and Table 1.

As one can see from Figure 2, there are three vertical stalagmite-like “icicles” separating four multiple-item groupings. On a potential partitioning range of 1 to 20, the three separators have values of approximately 7,6 , and 4, respectively, with 1 being the strongest possible separator. The separation points occur between items 15 and 2 1; 6 and 7; and 2 and 9.

Table 1 indicates assigned descriptors of four different kinds of belief in equal ability; they are-all group members are valuable, all members may be creative, growth potential is widespread, and general ability is widespread.


2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 6 3 8 7 5 1 9 1 0 6 7 2 3 2 9 4 8 5 4 1

ITEM NUMBERS

Figure 2. Cluster analysis of 21-item BE inventory, indicating item numbers in relation to partitioning values.

Alphas ranged from a low of .55 to a high of .68. These clusters were not used experimentally in this study, but have been refined and partial results are reported directly below.

Refinement of the BE Inventory

Subsequent to the results reported above, the BE scale has been revised to realize significantly greater reliability. Working with the item and cluster analysis reported above, additional items were written with the goal of having about 12 items for each of the 4 clusters in order to select 8 (arbitrary number) of the best items for each cluster. Criteria for item inclusion were high item- total test correlation, and low item-response variability.

In the course of this revision, two additional sources of extant equality- related items came to our attention. Two items about closeness of supervision in work settings from Wrightman’s (1964) Philosophy of Human Nature scales (1 964) were considered as indirectly relevant but were finally excluded. Also the inventory on the Nature of Man [sic] by Shostrom (1972) was evaluated. The items were rejected because they were designed to measure perceived personal characteristics of the respondent, rather than beliefs about the total human population.


Table 1

Cluster Analysis Results Including Cluster Number, Descriptor, Reliability, and Item Numbers

Cluster Number Assigned names Alpha Items

I All employees valuable .55 18, 17, 15 I1 Widespread creativity .67 21, 19, 11, 10,6

111 Growth potential .60 7, 12,3,2 IV General ability .68 9, 14, 8, 5,4, 1

The result of this work was an improved 32-item BE inventory, with eight items each in four clusters. Each of these clusters indicated substantial internal consistency (a low of .74 and a high of .83). The reliability estimate for the total 32-item inventory was .90. (The improved inventory is available from the first author; detailed results will be published.)

Discussion

The construct-validation hypothesis received considerable support. Subjects with a high belief in equality put more finds into training their subordinates and tended to delegate more responsibilities to them, contrasted with persons with a low belief in equality. The main effect was unambiguous at the .01 level, as already reported. However, the statistically stable discrimination for the two equality levels occurred only in the training task.

The strongest main effect was the task effect, but this effect was irrelevant to the construct-validation hypothesis of the study. Generally, participants were far more willing to invest in the training of their subordinates than to delegate additional responsibilities to them, regardless of equality levels. It would seem that the delegating task as it now stands is too demanding, that is, too harsh a test of democratic or equality-oriented beliefs. Also, idealistic college students may still feel they can do things better than anyone else, compared with older adults who have tempered their own opinions of themselves. Research in progress includes a sample from the business world, for this reason, and to ensure that the results will generalize.

The negative correlation with the authoritarian F scale is also supportive of construct validity (via divergent validity). The two measures have very


different belief referents with only a modest overlap. Future research will need to examine contemporary reconceptualizations of authoritarianism in relation- ship to equality.

All in all, we believe the results of this research to date constitute preliminary evidence for construct validity and reliability of the BE inventory. Additional research is well under way using the revised 32-item BE scale and a set of six validation tasks instead of just the two employed in this study. Results to date are very supportive of the construct validity of the BE scale. Research in progress includes both traditional college and older samples.

The equality construct holds considerable promise to explain a part of leadership behavior. The inherent vitality of the construct, the supporting results to date, and the lack of research on the subject are all reasons for further careful testing.

References

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1 950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.

Argyris, C. (1 962). Interpersonal competence and organizational effective- ness. Homewood, IL: Irwin-Dorsey.

Bales, R., & Couch, A. S. (1969). The value profile: A factor analytic study of value statements. Sociological Inquiry, 39, 1-1 7.

Blake, R. R., & McCanse, A. A. (1991). Leadership dilemmas-grid solutions. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.

Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S . (1964). The managerial grid. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.

Campbell, J. D., Tesser, A., & Fairey, P. J. (1986). Conformity and attention to the stimulus: Some temporal and contextual dynamics. JournaZ of Person- ality and Social Psychology, 51, 315-324.

Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic Press.

Connor, S. (1 989). The construct validation of an equality inventory. Unpub- lished manuscript, Westminster College, New Wilmington, PA.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrica, 16,297-334.

Cronbach, L. J. (1989). Construct validation after thirty years. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Intelligence, measurement, theory, and public policy (pp. 147- 17 1). Urbana: University of Ilinois Press.

Crutchfield, R. S. (1 955). Conformity and character. American Psychologist, 10, 191-198.


Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of crisis. Cambridge, MA: Center for Advanced

Guilford, J. P. (1959). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill. Inglehart, R. (1985). Aggregate stability and individual-level flux in mass

belief systems: The level of analysis paradox. American Political Science Review, 79,97-116.

Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill.

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill. Miller, N., & Brewer, M. B. (1984). Groups in contact: The psychology of

Rokeach, M. (1 974). Change and stability in American value systems. Public

Rokeach, M., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1989). Stability and change in American

Shaw, M. E. (1978). Communication networks fourteen years later. In L.

Shostrom, E. L. (1 972). Manual (and test booklet), personal orientation inven-

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory ofhuman intelligence.

Turner, J. C., & Giles, H. (1981). Intergroup behavior. Chicago: University of

Wrightsman, L. (1964). Measurement of philosophies of human nature. Psy-

Engineering.

desegregation. Orlando: Academic Press.

Opinion Quarterly, 38, 232-238.

value priorities. American Psychologist, 44, 775-783.

Berkowitz (Ed.), Group processes (pp. 35 1-361).

tory. San Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chicago Press.

chological Reports, 14, 743-75 1.

Appendix

Belief in Equality Inventory

1. True talent is limited to a small segment of society. 2 . Most employees “have what it takes” to be productive if you can help

3. The capacity for growth and improvement are great in almost everyone. 4. Many people have very limited potential. 5. Many employees just do not have what it takes to do a good job. 6. When you look at the masses, there is a sea of untapped talent there. 7. Leadership qualities can be developed by any normal person. 8. Regardless of how favorable the environment, we cannot expect most

9. It is easy to pick out the very few people of exceptional growth.

release it.

people to improve their performance very much.


10. Most people could be far more creative and productive under the right

11. There are people of unusual potential all around us. 12. There are relatively few people who are really dull, dense, and generally

13. The desire to work and be productive is quite prevalent. 14. In the main, people are not too bright or alert. 15. There should be equality for everyone because we are all human beings. 16. A group of equals will work a lot better than a group with a rigid hierarchy. 17. All employees are worthwhile to a business. 18. As a leader, one should have equal concern and care for all workers. 19. The different forms of creativity of employees are beneficial to a business. 20. Most potential in employees goes unnoticed. 2 1. All people should have the chance to be curious and contribute to an idea.

conditions.

incompetent.

the belief in equality inventory and leadership behavior: a construct validation

Documents