Thus, collective efficacy is the shared beliefs of group members about whether they can work together to achieve the goal of a specific task ( Sun and Lin, 2022).Ĭollective efficacy has been correlated with various organizational outcomes, such as job satisfaction and burnout ( Yurt, 2022), organizational belongingness, organizational commitment, and job wellbeing ( Awuor et al., 2022 Gómez-Leal et al., 2022 Sánchez-Rosas et al., 2022). Belief in the capabilities of a group to organize and execute the courses of action required to achieve a goal is an essential organizational property because it facilitates goal attainment ( Salloum, 2021). The development of personal efficacy depends not only on individual assets but also on the social and institutional resources with which individuals come into contact ( Reyes-Rodríguez et al., 2021). However, collective efficacy might not strongly relate to subjective wellbeing but to school-context variables.Ĭollective efficacy refers to the shared belief within a group structure about their standard abilities related to the organization and execution of courses of action ( Gurcay et al., 2009), thus extending the theory of efficacy from the individual level to the group organizational level ( Bandura, 1986). Convergent validity was also established.Ĭonclusion: The psychometric results suggest that a two-factor structure for the CES-SF is a valid and reliable measure for this construct for Chilean teachers. Best fit has been found to retain two new factors (opportunities and challenges for collective efficacy) with eight items each, yielding a McDonald’s ω of 0.803. Results: The CES-SF showed mixed results about its construct validity. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to assess the construct validity of the CES-SF. They were assessed using the CES-SF, Personal Well-being Index, Social Well-Being Scale, and satisfaction with the school. Methods: A cross-sectional research was conducted on a 693 sample of teachers ( M age = 39.4 SD = 11.8) from schools in the 16 regions of Chile. However, there is no conclusive evidence that collective efficacy corresponds to a two-factor model or single-factor structure. Previous research has shown a two-factor structure considering the perception of the group competence about their teaching capabilities and task analysis that refers to the opportunities inherent to a specific task. 2Facultad de Educación y Ciencias Sociales, Universidad Andres Bello, Santiago, Chileīackground: The Collective Efficacy Scale Short-Form (CES-SF) is a short and reliable instrument that assesses collective efficacy in schools at a group level.1Doctorado en Salud, Bienestar y Calidad de Vida, Facultat d’Educació i Psicologia, Universitat de Girona, Girona, Spain.New York: Plenum Press.Camilo Herrera 1*, Javier Torres-Vallejos 2 and Jonathan Martínez-Libano 2 Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation and adjustment: Theory, research and application (pp. J., Blair, V., Peterson, C., & Zazanis, M. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 65–85. Personality and teamwork behavior in context: The cross-level moderating role of collective efficacy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 814–828. Collective efficacy, group potency, and group performance: Meta-analyses of their relationships and test of a mediation model. International Journal of Stress Management, 18(2), 181–195. Coping strategies and collective efficacy as mediators between stress appraisal and quality of life among rescue workers. Prati, G., Pietrantoni, L., & Cicognani, E. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 819–832. A meta-analysis of team efficacy, potency, and performance: Interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. American Journal of Epidemiology, 173, 1453–1462.īandura, A. Collective efficacy and major depression in urban neighborhoods.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |