Masters Theses


"The present study attempted to investigate a never explored research question, i.e., whether an observed engagement measure would be as valid as self-reported engagement measure. Data were collected from the employees of an academic institute. Minimum of 110 self-ratings from subordinate employees (i.e. the self-raters) and 110 observer-ratings from those subordinates' respective supervisor employees (i.e. the other raters) were supposed to be collected to robustly test the formulated hypotheses of the present study. However, due to some sudden structural changes within the organization (i.e. the academic institute from where data were collected), only 32 observer-ratings and 32 self-ratings (i.e. 32 matched pairs) could be gathered. Therefore, instead of 110 pairs, the statistical analyses (such as- bivariate correlations, exploratory factor analyses, multiple regression analyses) were administered on 32 matched pairs only. As the validity is the appropriateness and accuracy of the interpretation of the scores of the measure, based on the findings from the present study, the study showed that the measure of observed engagement was not found to be as valid as self-reported engagement measure in terms of the construct, content, or predictive validity. In other words, none of the proposed hypotheses were supported. Furthermore, apart from the restructuring issues within the approached organization, there were some other limitations that transpired in the present study which are discussed in detail"--Abstract, page iii.


Reynolds Kueny, Clair

Committee Member(s)

Burns, Devin Michael
Weidner, Nathan W.


Psychological Science

Degree Name

M.S. in Industrial-Organizational Psychology


Missouri University of Science and Technology

Publication Date

Fall 2018


xi, 127 pages

Note about bibliography

Includes bibliographical references (pages 120-126).


© 2018 Debarati Majumdar, All rights reserved.

Document Type

Thesis - Open Access

File Type




Thesis Number

T 11433

Electronic OCLC #


Included in

Psychology Commons