EMPIRICALLY WORDED RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND ASSOCIATED HYPOTHESES

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

EMPIRICALLY WORDED RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND ASSOCIATED HYPOTHESES

Research Aim 1: This first aim of this study was to build on a comprehensive strengths- based framework to develop reliable and valid measures of strong formal and informal

organizational support that are useful for research on UR undergraduate students in summer research pipeline interventions. More specifically, the results were used for measure

development.

(1a) What are the ethnic and gender differences among pipeline intervention participants on specific items used to measure the multiple components of formal organizational support? To accommodate the parameters of the statistical analyses, this research question was divided into two empirically-oriented research sub-questions.

What are the ethnic differences among pipeline intervention participants on specific items used to measure the multiple components of formal organizational support? What are the gender differences among pipeline intervention participants on specific items used to measure the multiple components of formal organizational support?

The sub-questions were assessed via the ANOVA procedure. Table 4.1 presented results from the analysis. Results from testing the statistical assumptions for ANOVA are presented in Appendix E.

(1b) Do UR students in the more strongly designed CIC-SROP programs actually perceive higher levels of formal organizational support than UR students in other pipeline interventions with fewer formal program components?

How do URM students perceive levels of formal organizational support within strongly designed pipeline interventions (in CIC-SROP programs) compared to pipeline

interventions with fewer formal components (OSROP)?

A series of independent t-tests was conducted to compare CIC-SROP and OSROP participant responses on the items designed to assess Formal Organizational Support. Results from the analysis are summarized in Table 4.2. Results from testing the statistical assumptions for t-tests are presented in Appendix E.

(1c) In addition to formal organizational support, do UR students in SROP interventions also benefit from strong informal organizational support from three major program sources – faculty mentors, staff and peers?

How do URM students perceive levels of strong informal organizational support within strongly designed pipeline interventions compared to pipeline interventions with fewer formal components?

The repeated measures ANOVA procedure was conducted to assess differences across the three major informal program components. Results from the analysis are summarized in Table 4.3. Details regarding the test of statistical assumptions for ANOVA can be found in Appendix E.

(1d.1) Can strong formal and informal organizational support within pipeline

interventions be measured with reliable and valid scales that include empirically distinguishable subscales representing multiple components? To accommodate the parameters of the statistical analyses, this research question was divided into four empirically oriented research sub-

assessing reliability. Each question was evaluated using a different statistical procedure. Details for each sub-question and associated analyses are presented in the paragraphs below.

To what degree do the hypothesized scales of formal organizational support emerge empirically as separate and distinct latent factors for the SROP participant data collected in this study?

This sub-research question was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Table 4.4 presents a summary of the results from the factor analysis of the formal organizational support (FOS) items. Details regarding the results from testing the statistical assumptions are presented in Appendix E.

To what degree do the observed factors of informal organizational support scales emerge empirically as separate and distinct latent factors for the SROP participant data

collected in this study?

This sub-research question was assessed using exploratory factor analysis. An EFA was

performed for each of the three scales (faculty mentor, staff, and peers) contained in the Informal Organizational Support (IOS) Scale. Details regarding the results from testing the statistical assumptions are presented in Appendix E. Results are presented in Tables 4.5, 4.6, and 4.7.

What is the reliability of the data collected from the strong pipeline intervention formal organizational support scales?

This research question was addressed through the use of a reliability analysis. The coefficient alphas and means for the Formal Organizational Support Scale are presented in Table 4.8. There are no statistical assumptions associated with the reliability analysis.

What is the reliability of the data collected from the strong pipeline intervention formal and informal organizational support scales?

This research question was addressed with a reliability analysis. The coefficient alphas and means for the IOS Scale are presented in Table 4.9. There are no statistical assumptions associated with the reliability analysis.

(1d.2) Can formal organizational support scales and subscales help to better clarify

meaningful differences between strong CIC-SROP and OSROP interventions?

What are the differences between participants in the strong CIC-SROP and OSROP interventions on the formal organizational support scales?

This question was tested via the ANOVA procedure. Table 4.10 presents the results from the analysis. Results from testing the statistical assumptions for ANOVA are presented in Appendix E.

(1d.3) Is there a significant relationship between strong formal and informal organizational support scales?

What are the relationships between formal and informal organizational support measures and the two dependent variables in this study?

This research question was addressed with a correlation analysis. Results from the correlation analysis are presented in Table 4.11. There are no statistical assumptions associated with a correlation analysis.

Research Aim 2: This second aim of this study was to explore in greater detail a set of

strengths-based predictive relationships to further establish the validity of the formal and

informal organizational support scales described above. More specifically, the results were used to explore how strong formal and informal organizational support measures explain overall program satisfaction and successful STEM outcomes among UR students in summer research pipeline interventions.

(2a) In addition to objective pipeline intervention participation, do formal and informal organizational support factors further enhance program satisfaction and successful STEM outcomes?

How well do objective pipeline intervention participation formal organizational support scale scores, informal organizational support scale scores, STEM major, and STEM major interactions predict program satisfaction?

This sub-question was assessed via hierarchical linear regression (HLR) procedures. Results from testing the statistical assumptions for HLR are presented in Appendix E.

The sub-question listed above was assessed via the HLR procedures. Table 4.12 presents results from the analysis for predicting overall program satisfaction. Table 4.13 presents results of the analysis for predicting STEM career plans. Results from testing the statistical assumptions for HLR are presented in Appendix E.

(2b) Are the effects of formal and informal organizational support on successful STEM outcomes stronger among pipeline intervention participants facing higher role stress?

To what degree do pipeline intervention participation, organizational support, adaptive strengths, role stress, and role stress interactions by adaptive strengths among pipeline intervention participants predict overall program satisfaction?

The sub-questions listed above were assessed via the HLR procedures. Table 4.14 presents results from the analysis for predicting overall program satisfaction. Table 4.15 presents results from the analysis for predicting STEM career plans. Results from testing the statistical

assumptions for HLR are presented in Appendix E.

(2c) In addition to strong organizational and informal organizational support, do adaptive strengths among pipeline intervention participants help to buffer any deleterious effects of role stress on their successful STEM outcomes?

To what degree do formal and informal organizational supports, pipeline intervention participation, STEM major, adaptive strengths, role stress, and role stress interactions among pipeline intervention participants predict overall program satisfaction?

The sub-questions listed above were assessed via the HLR procedures. Table 4.16 presents results from the analysis for predicting overall program satisfaction. Table 4.17 presents results from the analysis for predicting STEM research career plans. Results from testing the statistical assumptions for HLR are presented in Appendix E.

APPENDIX E

In document Organizational Support, Satisfaction, and STEM Research Career Plans in Pipeline Interventions: A Strengths-Based Approach among Underrepresented Students. (Page 151-157)