3. Producción
Browse
3 results
Search Results
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Bringing managers closer to papers: measuring the relevance of business and management research(Taylor & Francis, 2021-12-14)This study aims to validate a data collection tool’s psychometric properties to explore whether business management research’s relevance is a high-order construct made up of its perceived interest and perceived relevance. The authors conducted a confirmatory factor analysis to validate a two-factor scale. The sample was composed of 148 MBA students from a Peruvian business school. Results showed the appropriate levels of validity and reliability and confirmed the usefulness of this data set for exploring the relationship between perceived interest and relevance. Businesses and schools can replicate the validated tool for reviewing their curricula and teaching practices, exploring the gap between business and management research results and advancing managers’ research literacy and evidence-based practice in business education and training. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, The Aggressive Gender Backlash in Intimate Partner Relationships: A Theoretical Framework and Initial Measurement(Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI), 2025-07-01)This study introduces and validates a novel instrument to measure aggressive gender backlash (AGB), a distinct and underexplored dimension of gender backlash (GB) within intimate partner relationships. Based on the General Aggression Model, a multidimensional scale was developed and tested using data from 513 Peruvian female microentrepreneurs. Results demonstrate solid evidence of reliability, discriminant validity, and predictive validity across five dimensions: hostility, the withdrawal of support, sabotage/coercion, gender stereotyping, and masculine victimization. The findings reveal that AGB is more prevalent than intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) and often precedes it. AGB encompasses covert, non-violent behaviors that aim to resist female empowerment, such as emotional sabotage, manipulation, and disqualification, often normalized within relationships. This construct is significantly associated with lower levels of empowerment, increased subordination, emotional morbidity, and decreased work productivity. This study redefines GB as an interpersonal process measurable at the individual level and provides the first validated tool for its assessment. By conceptualizing AGB as a persistent, harmful, and functionally equivalent mechanism to IPVAW, though not necessarily physically violent, this research fills a key gap in gender violence literature. It offers practical implications for early detection and prevention strategies.2 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Measuring Organizational Gender Backlash Against Women Leaders: Scale Development, Psychometric Evidence, and Associations With Career Self-Limitation(Wiley, 2026-01-01)This study develops and evaluates preliminary psychometric evidence for the Organizational Gender Backlash Scale (OGB‐S), a candidate measure of gendered organizational practices through which women's authority, competence, legitimacy, and access to strategic resources are challenged when they occupy or exercise leadership in masculine‐coded domains. As exploratory nomological evidence, the study examines whether OGB is associated with leadership‐related psychological and health strain and symbolic career self‐limitation among women leaders. A non‐probabilistic, purposive sample of 271 women holding formal or informal leadership positions in Peruvian organizations participated in the study. The OGB‐S was evaluated as a theoretically specified set of organizational backlash indicators covering hostility/cognitive invalidation, sabotage/obstruction, exclusion, and gender stereotyping/role policing. The revised analytical strategy follows a preliminary validity‐evidence sequence: ordinal CFA model comparisons for internal structure, reliability estimation, item‐functioning analyses conditional on the supported structure, exploratory spatial and network mapping, and nomological associations with leadership‐related strain and symbolic career self‐limitation. The complementary analyses are interpreted as exploratory or nomological evidence, not as substitutes for CFA‐based structural validation. Ordinal CFA did not support strict unidimensionality or a completed validation claim. None of the tested CFA specifications reached conventional close‐fit thresholds because RMSEA remained elevated across models. The one‐factor model for the 16 theoretically specified core items showed acceptable incremental fit but elevated absolute misfit (CFI = 0.957, TLI = 0.951, RMSEA = 0.119, SRMR = 0.061). A correlated four‐factor model improved fit (CFI = 0.976, TLI = 0.970, RMSEA = 0.093, SRMR = 0.049), and a second‐order model remained plausible but still short of close fit (CFI = 0.973, TLI = 0.967, RMSEA = 0.097, SRMR = 0.052). Reliability was high (alpha = 0.947; omega total = 0.964; Schmid–Leiman omega hierarchical = 0.842). These findings support preliminary coherence and relative multidimensional structure, not definitive construct validation or readiness for applied diagnostic use. In the two‐stage PLS‐PM exploratory nomological model, OGB was positively associated with leadership‐related strain (beta = 0.597) and with symbolic career self‐limitation through strain (indirect beta = 0.311), accounting for 35.7% of variance in strain and 55.0% in self‐limitation. The study operationalizes Organizational Gender Backlash as role‐contingent practices reported by women leaders themselves, extending backlash research beyond experimental penalties and proxy outcomes. It offers the OGB‐S as an initial measurement framework for studying how women's authority is challenged after they enter or exercise leadership roles. Consistent with the CFA evidence, the scale should be treated as a preliminary instrument requiring further item refinement, replication, and external validation.1