Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36003095›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Learning from mistakes climate scale: Development and validation.

Michelle Chin Chin Lee, Su Woan Wo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Michelle Chin Chin LeeSchool of Psychology, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Su Woan WoDepartment of Psychology, Sunway University, Bandar Sunway, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Learning from mistakes plays an important role in employee development; however, such a learning scale has not yet been developed. The objective of this study was to develop and examine the psychometric properties of the Learning from Mistakes Climate Scale (LMCS) in Malaysia. A pool of items was first developed based on the literature, with an expert panel then convened to select items that met the definition of learning from mistake climate in the workplace, specifically in Malaysia. The experts agreed on 23 items to be rated. In total, 554 working adults with a mean age of 32.28 were then recruited for this study. The LMCS was administered at baseline and 10-14 days later as a retest: 468 participants took part in the retest study, a dropout rate of 15.52%. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the LMCS is a 17-item one-factor model. Validity, in its various forms, was supported, namely convergent validity, criterion validity, and predictive validity. Analysis also showed significant reliability, that is, test-retest reliability and in all intra-class correlations. The LMCS was found to be a valid and reliable instrument to assess the learning from mistake climate in Malaysia. This is the first scale in the organizational learning climate literature to integrate the mistake tolerance aspect. This instrument can assist in creating a psychologically safe work environment that helps to facilitate learning, especially in a highly hierarchical, collectivistic culture that is high in power distance.

Indexed as

employeelearning from mistakes climateMalaysiascale developmentvalidation

Identifiers

PMID36003095
PMCPMC9394742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.