MOTIVATION

MOTIVATION Imagin" rel="nofollow">ine that Dr. Maxime Tremblay, the lead researcher in" rel="nofollow">in developin" rel="nofollow">ing the Work Extrin" rel="nofollow">insic and Intrin" rel="nofollow">insic Work Motivation Scale (WEIM) (Tremblay, et al., 2009) is a professional colleague of yours, and that she has asked for your candid opin" rel="nofollow">inion on the rigor of the procedures that the researchers used to validate the WEIM measure. You would like to have the opportunity to work with Dr. Tremblay in" rel="nofollow">in the future, therefore you are eager to poin" rel="nofollow">int out the many strengths of the procedures that she and her colleagues used. However, you would also like to establish yourself as a credible expert who can provide critical in" rel="nofollow">input to further strengthen their work in" rel="nofollow">in the future. With these goals in" rel="nofollow">in min" rel="nofollow">ind, please: • Assess and critique the adequacy of the procedures used to test the validity of the WEIM. Describe the meanin" rel="nofollow">ing of in" rel="nofollow">internal, external, and construct validity, and in" rel="nofollow">indicate whether and how each is related to other types of validity. 1. Identify and assess the strengths of the procedures that Tremblay, et al. used to test the validity of the WEIM. Consider, for example, how their article would be coded accordin" rel="nofollow">ing to the 11 attributes that Boudreau, et al. (2001) employed and/or the 13 codes that Scandura and Williams (2001) used, and why. 1. Constructively critique the procedures that Tremblay, et al. used to test the validity of the WEIM by notin" rel="nofollow">ing any major gaps, omissions, or lack of clarity, and recommendin" rel="nofollow">ing ways to address those issues in" rel="nofollow">in the future.