ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Learning from mistakes climate scale: Development and validation.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of a Group Organizational Learning Activity Inventory for the Implementation and Sustainability of Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing.Journal of nursing management · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.