Analysis of role conflict and role ambiguity in a structural equations framework

Abstract

In this study a confirmatory methodology was implemented to analyze a model that uses the J. R. Rizzo et al (see record 1971-01407-001 ) scales of role conflict (RC) and role ambiguity (RA; i.e., the A. G. Bedeian and A. A. Armenakis [see PA, Vol 66:4547] model). The validity of the RC and RA scales were examined through structural equations analysis, and a nested models approach was used to compare the Bedeian and Armenakis model with a model suggesting a more parsimonious representation of the data. Furthermore, path estimates from models incorporating random measurement error were compared with estimates from a model not incorporating the effects of random measurement error. Results indicate that the RC and RA measures meet some established thresholds of convergent and discriminant validity. However, the causal results suggest a more parsimonious representation of the effects of RC and RA than that posited by Bedeian and Armenakis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)