LDRS 591 Activity 5.3
Jenkins, M., & Stewart, A. C. (2010). The importance of a servant leader orientation. Health Care Management Review, 35(1), 46-54.
Were the data rigorously scored and reported ?
Procedures used to collect data seemed to be consistent . They measured the 2 independent variables using a 5point Likert-like scale. I could not find mention of what statistical software program was used. Score 2.
Were good descriptive analyses reported ?
Descriptive statistics were used in the form of standard deviation, and z score. Score 3.
Were good hypothesis testing procedures used?
The authors formulated 3 hypotheses. They did demonstrate the application of all 5 steps of the hypothesis testing process as described by Plan-Clark and Creswell (2015, p. 264). Score 2.
What inferential statistics were used ?
As mentioned above, the hypothesis testing wasn’t elaborated upon. I did not find mention of alpha value in the results or analysis sections, though it is mentioned in the results tables. They calculated the r2 (coefficient of determination) to measure the relation of ‘commitment to serve’ and role inversion behavior’ to ‘job satisfaction’ . Score 3.
What were the results? Were the results comprehensive?
The results suggest that role inversion behavior and commitment to serve alone do not lead to job satisfaction (hypothesis 1 & 2), but the interaction of both these variable maximizes job satisfaction ( hypothesis 3). Score 3.
Did the results include sufficient information?
The results included sufficient information to come to the above conclusion. The study disproved hypothesis 1 and 2, but proved hypothesis 3. None of the hypotheses were worded as ‘null’ hypotheses, instead all three were laid out as alternative hypotheses. Score 2.
Did the analysis represent a good quantitative process?
The data analysis was not easy to follow. The authors talk about ‘models’ which are not clearly specified in the methods or results. I was not able to understand their results based on their analysis, and had to rely on the discussion and conclusions to understand whether the study supported their hypotheses. Score 1.
Total score 16. Adequate study.
Reference
Plano-Clark, V., Creswell, J. (2015). Understanding research: A consumer’s guide. (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Leave a Reply