Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The American Review of Public Administration
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0275074008317681v1
0275074008317681v2
39/2/149    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Revising Perry's Measurement Scale of Public Service Motivation

Sangmook Kim

Seoul National University of Technology, smook{at}snut.ac.kr

J. L. Perry (1996) identified a 24-item multidimensional scale to measure public service motivation (PSM). But the measurement scale of PSM is not fully examined. On the basis of Perry's items, S. Kim (in press) produced a 14-item scale of four factors, but the dimension of attraction to policy making (APM) in the second-order model is doubtful. The present study revises the questionable items of the APM dimension into more positive and relevant ones and tests whether the dimension of APM is valid. Two independent samples (n1 = 690 and n 2 = 498) are used for the scale validation. The statistical analysis applied confirmatory factor analysis using Amos 7.0. The modification process, which generated a 12-item scale for four factors, produced a valid and reliable measure: the test results provided support for convergent validity as well as discriminant validity of the four-factor model, and the reliability coefficients of all subscales were good.

Key Words: public service motivation • measurement scale • second-order factor analysis • scale validation • confirmatory factor analysis

This version was published on March 1, 2009

The American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 39, No. 2, 149-163 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0275074008317681
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?