Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T03:46:39.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preliminary Validation of the Spanish Version of the Multiple Stimulus Types Ambiguity Tolerance Scale (MSTAT-II)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

José L. Arquero  and
David L. McLain
José L. Arquero*
Affiliation:
Universidad de Sevilla (Spain)
David L. McLain
Affiliation:
State University of New York (USA)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to José L. Arquero. FCEYE- Universidad de Sevilla. Ramón y Cajal 1. 41018 Sevilla. (Spain). E-mail: arquero@us.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Despite widespread interest in ambiguity tolerance and other informationrelated individual differences, existing measures are conceptually dispersed and psychometrically weak. This paper presents the Spanish version of MSTAT-II, a short, stimulus-oriented, and psychometrically improved measure of an individual's orientation toward ambiguous stimuli. Results obtained reveal adequate reliability, validity, and temporal stability. These results support the use of MSTAT-II as an adequate measure of ambiguity tolerance.

A pesar del amplio interés en la tolerancia a la ambigüedad y a otras diferencias individuales relacionadas con la información, las medidas existentes son conceptualmente dispersas y presentan deficiencias psicométricas. El propósito de este trabajo es presentar la versión española del MSTAT II, un instrumento de medida de las orientaciones de un individuo respecto a estímulos ambiguos con mejoras psicométricas sustanciales, independiente del contexto y suficientemente corto para ser utilizado junto con otras medidas. Los resultados obtenidos en cuanto a consistencia interna, estabilidad temporal y validez son satisfactorios. Estos resultados apoyan el uso del MSTAT-II en su versión española como una medida adecuada de tolerancia a la ambigüedad.

Keywords

ambiguity toleranceorganizational behaviordecision makinguncertaintytolerancia a la ambigüedadcomportamiento organizacionaltoma de decisionesincertidumbre
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , May 2010 , pp. 476 - 484
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adorno, T. W, Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The Authoritarian Personality, New York. Harper & Row. Also published in Cashmore, E., & Jennings, J. (2001). Racism: Essential Readings (pp. 81–90). London. Sage.Google Scholar
Arbuckle, J. L. (2005). Amos 6.0 User's Guide. Spring House, PA: Amos Development CorporationGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, A. J., Riggio, R. E., & Mayes, B. T. (1996). Reliability and factor structure of Budner's Tolerance for Ambiguity Scale. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 625–632.Google Scholar
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhushan, L. I., & Amal, S. B. (1986). A situational test of intolerance of ambiguity, Psychologia, 29, 254–261.Google Scholar
Block, J., & Block, J. (1951). An investigation of the relationship between intolerance of ambiguity and ethnocentrism, Journal of Personality, 19, 303–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research, 17, 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Budner, J. (1962). Tolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable, Journal of Personality, 30, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, C. C., & Hooijberg, R. (2000). Ambiguity intolerance and support for valuing-diversity interventions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2392–2408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulter, T. (1953). An experimental and statistical study on the relationship of prejudice and certain personality variables, Doctoral Dissertation, University of London Library.Google Scholar
Crowne, D. P., & Marlow, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeRoma, V. M., Martin, K. M., & Kessler, M. L. (2003). The relationship between tolerance for ambiguity and need for course structure. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30, 104–109.Google Scholar
Dunham, R. B., Grube, J. A., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Pierce, J. L. (1989). The development of an attitude toward change instrument. Washington, DC: Academy of Management Annual Meeting.Google Scholar
Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 643–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1948). Tolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. American Psychologist, 3, 268.Google Scholar
Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1949). Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. Journal of Personality, 18, 108–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1974). Personality theory and perception. Psychological Issues. 8, 92–160.Google ScholarPubMed
Furnham, A. (1994). A content, correlational and factor analytic study of four tolerance of ambiguity questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furnham, A., & Ribchester, T. (1995). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14, 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambleton, R. K. (2001). The next generation of the ITC test translation and adaptation guidelines. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 164–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambleton, R. K., & Kanjee, A. (1995). Increasing the validity of cross-cultural assessments: Use of improved methods for test adaptations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 13, 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoelter, J. W. (1983). The analysis of covariance structures: Goodness-of-fit indices. Sociological Methods and Research, 11, 325–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogarth, R. (1989). Ambiguity in competitive decision-making: Some implications and tests. In Fishburn, P. C. & Lavelle, I. (Eds.), Annals of Operations Research, 19, 31–50.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. T., & Ginsberg, R. (1958). The specificity of intolerance of ambiguity measures. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 56, 300–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirton, M. J. (1981). A reanalysis of two scales of tolerance of ambiguity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 405–414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kischkel, K-H. (1984). A scale for the measurement of ambiguity tolerance. Diagnostica, 30, 144–154.Google Scholar
Lange, R., & Houran, J. (1999). Scaling MacDonald's AT-20 using item-response theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 467–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauriola, M., & Levin, I. P. (2001). Relating individual differences in attitude toward ambiguity to risky choices. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14, 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 26, 791–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matud Aznar, M. P., García Rodríguez, M., & Matud Aznar, M. J. (2002). Estrés laboral y salud en el profesorado: un análisis diferencial en función del género y del tipo de enseñanza. Revista Internacional de Psicología Clínica y de la Salud, 2, 451–465.Google Scholar
Matud Aznar, M. P., García Rodríguez, M., & Matud Aznar, M. J. (2006). Estrés y malestar en el profesorado. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 6, 63–76.Google Scholar
McDonald, R. P., & Marsh, H. W. (1990). Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLain, D. L. (1993). The MSTAT-I: A new measure of an individual's tolerance for ambiguity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 183–189.Google Scholar
McLain, D. L. (2008). Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure (MSTAT-II). Psychological Reports. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Moreno Murcia, J. A., González-Cutre Coll, D., & Chillón Garzón, M. (2009). Preliminary validation in Spanish of a scale designed to measure motivation in physical education classes: The perceived locus of causality (PLOC) Scale. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12, 327–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norton, R. W. (1975). Measure of ambiguity tolerance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 39, 607–619.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nunnally, J. C. (1976). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
O'Connor, P. (1952). Ethnocentrism, ‘intolerance of ambiguity’, and abstract reasoning ability. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 526–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poesio, M. (1996). Semantic ambiguity and perceived ambiguity. In van Deemter, K. and Peters, S. (Eds.), Semantic ambiguity and underspecification, (pp. 159–201). Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Ray, J. J. (1988). Cognitive style as predictor of authoritarianism, conservatism, and racism: A fantasy in many movements, Political Psychology, 9, 303–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rector, N. A., & Roger, D. (1993). Self-concept and emotioncontrol. Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Meeting of the European Congress of Psychology. Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Rector, N. A., & Roger, D. (1996). Cognitive style and well-being: A prospective examination. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 663–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rydell, S. T., & Rosen, E. (1966). Measurement and some correlates of need-cognition. Psychological Reports, 19, 139–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teven, J. J., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1998). Measuring tolerance for disagreement. Communication Research Reports, 15, 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troldahl, V., & Powell, F. (1965). A short form dogmatism scale for use in field studies. Social Forces, 44, 211–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viscusi, W. K., & Chesson, H. (1999). Hopes and fears: The conflicting effects of risk ambiguity. Theory and Decision, 47, 153–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westie, F. R. (1953). A technique for the measurement of race attitudes. American Sociological Review, 18, 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckerman, M. (1984). Sensation seeking: A comparative approach to a human trait. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 413–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar