CONSTRUCT-VALIDITY OF RIZZO ET AL.S (1970) ROLE-CONFLICT AND AMBIGUITY SCALES - A MULTISAMPLE STUDY

The construct validity of Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman's (1970) scales h as been seriously criticised during recent years. The criticisms are b ased on the wording of the items comprising these scales, which causes the substantive interpretation of the scales to be perfectly confound ed with the direction of item wording. The criticisms of the scales ha ve stimulated alternative factor models. Replicating and extending Kel loway and Barling's (1990) study, confirmatory factor analysis of Rizz o et al.'s scales and a role overload scale consisting of positively a nd negatively worded items was used to test the construct validity of role conflict and ambiguity scales. Five alternative factor models wer e compared in two distinct samples (N-1 = 173 and N-2 = 273). A model that posits three first-order factors consistent with substantive inte rpretations of role conflict, role ambiguity, and role overload, and a second-order general role stress factor, fitted the data better than the other four models in both samples, thus supporting the scales' con struct validity.