IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jomorg/v16y2010i01p180-190_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The validity of Performance Environment Perception Scales: Environmental predictors of citizenship performance

Author

Listed:
  • Poropat, Arthur E.

Abstract

This research examined the validity of Performance Environment Perception Scales (PEPS), a new instrument designed to assess performance-relevant aspects of the work environment. A sample of 156 employees of an Australian university completed PEPS and their supervisors rated their task and citizenship performance. Confirmatory Factor Analysis showed PEPS to have a valid factor structure, and PEPS were found to be significantly correlated with citizenship performance, but not with task performance. Although this finding is consistent with theoretical predictions, PEPS are apparently the first measures of work environment perceptions that have confirmed this. Thus PEPS show promise as measures for use in future research and organizational development projects that focus on relationships between the work environment and performance. Limitations of the research and implications for the validity of PEPS, as well as for future research and practice, are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Poropat, Arthur E., 2010. "The validity of Performance Environment Perception Scales: Environmental predictors of citizenship performance," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 180-190, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jomorg:v:16:y:2010:i:01:p:180-190_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1833367200002352/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jomorg:v:16:y:2010:i:01:p:180-190_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jmo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.