@article{SeewannVerwiebe2020,
  author    = {Seewann, Lena and Verwiebe, Roland},
  title     = {How do people interpret the value concept?},
  series = {Journal of beliefs and values},
  volume    = {41},
  journal   = {Journal of beliefs and values},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1469-9362},
  doi       = {10.1080/13617672.2019.1707748},
  pages     = {419 -- 432},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Value research has a long and extensive history of theoretical definitions and empirical investigations using large scale quantitative surveys. However, the way the general population understands, defines, and relates to the concept of values, and how these views vary across individuals is seldom addressed. The present study examined subjective interpretations of the term through focus group interviews, and reports on the development of a Value Conceptualisation Scale (VCS) that distinguishes six dimensions of different views on values: normativity, relevance, validity, stability, consistency, and awareness. Focus group interviews (n = 38) as well as several surveys (n = 100, n = 1519, n = 903, n = 94) were used to develop, refine, and test the scale in terms of response variety, temporal stability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity. These systematic results show that views on values do indeed vary significantly between participants. Correlations with dogmatism, preference for consistency, and metacognition were found for corresponding dimensions. The VCS provides an original measure, which enables future research to explore this variation on the conceptualisation of values.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{SeewannVerwiebe2020,
  author    = {Seewann, Lena and Verwiebe, Roland},
  title     = {How do people interpret the value concept?},
  series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {4},
  issn      = {1867-5808},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-51584},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-515843},
  pages     = {16},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Value research has a long and extensive history of theoretical definitions and empirical investigations using large scale quantitative surveys. However, the way the general population understands, defines, and relates to the concept of values, and how these views vary across individuals is seldom addressed. The present study examined subjective interpretations of the term through focus group interviews, and reports on the development of a Value Conceptualisation Scale (VCS) that distinguishes six dimensions of different views on values: normativity, relevance, validity, stability, consistency, and awareness. Focus group interviews (n = 38) as well as several surveys (n = 100, n = 1519, n = 903, n = 94) were used to develop, refine, and test the scale in terms of response variety, temporal stability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity. These systematic results show that views on values do indeed vary significantly between participants. Correlations with dogmatism, preference for consistency, and metacognition were found for corresponding dimensions. The VCS provides an original measure, which enables future research to explore this variation on the conceptualisation of values.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KawasakiAkamatsuOmorietal.2020,
  author    = {Kawasaki, Yui and Akamatsu, Rie and Omori, Mika and Sugawara, Masumi and Yamazaki, Yoko and Matsumoto, Satoko and Fujiwara, Yoko and Iwakabe, Shigeru and Kobayashi, Tetsuyuki},
  title     = {Development and validation of the Expanded Mindful Eating Scale},
  series = {International journal of health care quality assurance},
  volume    = {33},
  journal   = {International journal of health care quality assurance},
  number    = {4-5},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited},
  address   = {Bingley},
  issn      = {0952-6862},
  doi       = {10.1108/IJHCQA-01-2020-0009},
  pages     = {309 -- 321},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Purpose To develop and validate the Expanded Mindful Eating Scale (EMES), an expanded mindful eating model created for the promotion of health and sustainability. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional study using self-administered questionnaire surveys on Ochanomizu Health Study (OHS) was conducted. The survey was provided to 1,388 female university students in Tokyo, Japan. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and a partial correlation analysis were used to confirm construct and criterion validity. Internal consistency of the EMES was confirmed to calculate Cronbach's alpha. Findings The response rate was 38.7 \% (n = 537). Mean BMI was 20.21 +/- 2.12, and 18.8\% of them were classified as "lean" (BMI < 18.5). The authors listed 25 items and obtained a final factor structure of five factors and 20 items, as a result of EFA. Through CFA, the authors obtained the following fit indices for a final model: GFI = 0.914, AGFI = 0.890, CFI = 0.870 and RMSEA = 0.061. The total EMES score was significantly correlated with BMI, mindfulness, body dissatisfaction, drive for thinness and life satisfaction (r = -0.138, -0.315, -0.339, -0.281 and 0.149,p < 0.01, respectively). Cronbach's alpha for all items in this scale was 0.687. Practical implications The authors suggest the possibility that practitioners and researchers of mindful eating that includes this new concept can use authors' novel scale as an effective measurement tool. Originality/value The EMES, which can multidimensionally measure the concept of the expanded model of mindful eating was first developed in this study.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Fischer2020,
  author    = {Fischer, Caroline},
  title     = {Knowledge Sharing in the Public Sector},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {xiii, 222},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {This dissertation examines the activity of knowledge sharing by public employees in the workplace. Building on the Rubicon model of human behavior formation, I use a threefold approach to analyze the knowledge-sharing process: public employees' motivation to share knowledge, their intention to share, and knowledge sharing behavior as such. The first article maps the knowledge-sharing behavior of public employees. It builds a typology of behavioral patterns and shows that public employees mainly share their knowledge responsively and directly with a knowledge receiver rather than an information medium. The second article elaborates on the construct of knowledge-sharing motivation and develops a scale to measure this kind of work motivation in a selective and domain-specific way. Data from three studies indicate three dimensions of knowledge-sharing motivation, namely appreciation, growth and altruism, and tangible rewards. Based on these dimensions, the third article analyzes whether the satisfaction of public employees' underlying needs can foster ther knowledge-sharing intention. The study indicates that both tested treatments (appreciation by co-workers, benefits in a performance appraisal) positively affect knowledge-sharing intention if it is explicit knowledge that ought to be shared. However, no effects of either treatment can be found if implicit knowledge is shared. Hence, to foster sharing of explicit knowledge, the analyzed motivation-enhancing rewards can be used in public management practice. To enhance implicit knowledge sharing, ability- and opportunity-enhancing management instruments are discussed. All in all, this dissertation integrates a micro-level perspective on human knowledge sharing into a meso-level perspective on organizational knowledge management. It adds to the literature on workplace behaviors of public employees and knowledge management and aims to incorporate knowledge sharing and management into the public administration and management literature.},
  language  = {en}
}