RETURN TO
PRINT BY SECTIONS
Analyzing Credibility:
A Study Examining
Demographic Factors and Personality Traits
that Influence Military Public Affairs' Credibility
Instruments
To measure credibility, we use the McCroskey’s (1966) source
credibility scale because it has been proven by many researchers to have
face and criterion-related validity. The article that first introduced this
scale has been referenced at least 100 times in previous research. This
scale has been used to confirm presumed credible speakers will actually be
perceived as credible (Rubin, 1981). The format of the scale has emerged as
the “predominant method of scaling” (Rubin, 1981, p. 335) credibility.
The communicative competence scale created
by Wiemann (1977) will be used to measure competence of the PAO. This scale
has been used in research numerous times and found to be effective with
alphas between .85 and .91 (Rubin, 1981). The specific scale used for the
PAOs is an adapted self-report format employed by Cupach and Spitzberg
(1983).
Many methods are available to test for
assertiveness and assertiveness training is offered by many different
organizations. The World Wide Web offers thousands of self-administered
assertiveness tests. For the purpose of this study, we are employing the
Rathus (1973) Assertiveness Schedule which Lorr and More (1980) claim as
“one of the better known self-report measures” (p. 128).
Cegala’s (1981) scale measures the degree a person possesses for high or low
interaction involvement. Researchers use this scale today because of its
track record of reliability and validity. “Test-retest reliability for the
trait Interaction Involvement Scale appears to be very good” (Rubin, 1981,
p. 187). Tests performed by Cegala et al. (1981) reported their test-retest
with reliable alpha levels in the .80s. Other tests by researchers reported
test-retest results with alpha levels in the .60s. “The Interaction
Involvement Scale also appears to be internally consistent” (Rubin, 1981, p.
187). Validity tests performed on this scale yielded evidence to concur
strong validity.
Statistical Analysis
Once the three
year survey is complete, the data collected could be analyzed using one of
two quantitative methods. The first possible method is to perform an
analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the results. The other approach is multiple
regression.
The ANOVA can be used since this study
examines at least two or more categorical independent variables, each with
at least two levels (i.e. personality trait high and low levels). This
factoral design will analyze the participants’ self-reported results of the
three trait independent variables which will be demonstrated by 2 x 2 x 2 =
F (credibility). A median will be found for each trait exposing the high
and low levels of that trait. This test will show the effect of each
variable independently on the dependent variable and the interaction of the
variables together. A Pearson’s correlation will be run between each
demographic variable and the dependent variable to examine the strength of
the relationship between the variables.
Table 1 is a factorial ANOVA visual
demonstration of this credibility study.
Table 1.
First
Second Third Fourth
Independent Independent
Independent Independent
Variable Variable
Variable Variable
_________________________________________________________________
Demographics:
Communication
Assertiveness: Interaction
Years of service Competency:
Involvement:
Training Hi/Low Hi/Low
Hi/Low
Multiple regression could also be used to analyze the results. Each subject will have an average score for each predictor variable (personality trait). The three independent variables will be utilized to predict individual’s credibility levels. Credibility results will be collected from the supervisor’s source-credibility survey.
RETURN TO
PRINT BY SECTIONS