Journal of Applied Psychology 1990, Vol. 75. No. 2, 148-157 Copyright 1990 by the American Psychological Association, I nc. 002I-9010/90/$00.75 Analysis of Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity in a Structural Equations Framework Richard G. Netemeyer, Mark W. Johnston, and Scot Burton Department of Marketing Louisiana State University In this study a confirmatory methodology was implemented to analyze a model that uses the Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman (1970) scales of role conflict (RC) and role ambiguity (RA; i.e., the Bedeian and Armenakis, 1981, model). The validity of the RC and RA scales were examined through structural equations analysis, and a nested models approach was used to compare the Bedeian and Armenakis model with a model suggesting a more parsimonious representation of the data. Furthermore, path estimates from models incorporating random measurement error were compared with estimates from a model not incorporating the effects of random measurement error. Results indicate that the RC and RA measures meet some established thresholds of convergent and discriminant validity. However, the causal results suggest a more parsimonious representation of the effects of RC and RA than that posited by Bedeian and Armenakis. The effects of role conflict and role ambiguity on a number of job-related attitudes and behaviors have been studied exten- sively. The meta-analyses of Fisher and Gitelson (1983) and Jackson and Schuler (1985) suggested that the impact of role conflict (RC) and role ambiguity (RA) on job-related attitudes and behaviors is pervasive. These constructs have been associ- ated with lower levels of job satisfaction, commitment, and job involvement as well as higher levels of tension and propensity to leave an organization (Jackson & Schuler, 1985). Although research on RC and RA is abundant, only a few studies have developed and tested causal models of the out- comes of role conflict and role ambiguity (e.g., Bedeian & Ar- menakis, 1981; Jackson, 1983; Kemery, Bedeian, Mossholder, & Touliatos, 1985). Although these studies have provided in- sight regarding the causal flow of RC and RA on job-related attitudes and behaviors, models estimating measurement error and causal paths simultaneously have rarely been examined. Researchers have recently suggested that the operationalization of many constructs, including RC and RA (Tracy & Johnson, 1981), may contain sufficient measurement error to bias esti- mates of the relationships among latent variables (Goldberger, 1971; James, Mulaik, & Brett, 1982; Kenny, 1979). As a result, there is a need to examine RC and RA within models that assess causal relationships among constructs and measurement error simultaneously. The issue of measurement error is especially relevant to re- search on role conflict and ambiguity because of the depen- dence on two scales to measure these constructs. As noted by Van Sell, Brief, and Schuler (1981), the vast majority of research We would like to thank Art Bedeian, Rodger Griffeth, Ed Kemery, Subhash Sharma, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful com- ments on earlier drafts of this article. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Rich- ard G. Netemeyer, Department of Marketing, College of Business, Loui- siana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803-6314. on RC and RA has used the scales developed by Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman (1970), prompting researchers to examine the psychometric properties of these scales as well as characteristics of the items within each scale (House, Schuler, & Levanoni, 1983; Schuler, Aldag, & Brief, 1977). In general, the results of these studies suggest that the Rizzo et al. scales are reliable mea- sures of role conflict and role ambiguity. However, others have questioned the discriminant validity between these scales as well as the convergent validity of their respective items (Howell, Bellenger, & Wilcox, 1987; Howell, Wilcox, Bellenger, & Chonko, 1988; Tracy & Johnson, 1981). The purpose of this article is to illustrate a proposed confir- matory methodology within the context of examining the effects of the role conflict and role ambiguity variables. Specifi- cally, the study extends previous research in three ways. First, the study examines the convergent and discriminant validity of the RC and RA measures through a structural equations analy- sis. Second, we compare the goodness-of-fit of models, suggest- ing a more parsimonious representation of the effects of RC and RA, with a theoretical model of RC and RA, the Bedeian and Armenakis (1981) model. Third, path estimates from a latent variables model (multiple scale items to represent the con- structs) are compared with path estimates generated through single-indicator models (summed scale indexes to represent the constructs) to illustrate the impact of random measurement er- ror on causal relationships. Theoretical Framework Model of Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity Role conflict and role ambiguity have been identified as ante- cedents of a number of job-related outcomes and behaviors (Behrman & Perreault, 1984; Steers, 1977; Steers & Mowday, 1981). One model that proposes several outcomes of RC and RA is the Bedeian and Armenakis (1981) model. The causal relationships and measurement specifications for this model are 148 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.