Role Conflict and Ambiguity

Abstract

The Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity scales were developed by House, Schuler, and Levanoni (1983) to provide a psychometrically rigorous measure free from the confounding issues present in earlier instruments. Previous measures were criticized for using items that conflated the constructs with outcome variables like stress and comfort. Specifically, earlier role conflict measures often utilized “stress worded” items, while role ambiguity measures employed “comfort worded” items. The aim of House and colleagues was to create distinct measures that accurately capture these two key organizational stressors, minimizing potential overlap with psychological outcomes.

In developing this measure, the authors tested a pool of 43 items which ultimately resolved into two distinct factors: one for Role Ambiguity and one for Role Conflict. The final scales represent a refined instrument for assessing these critical dimensions of organizational stress.

Keywords

Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity, Organizational Psychology, Job Stress, Occupational Strain, Job Dissatisfaction, Psychometric Scale, House Schuler Levanoni.

Authors

Robert J. House, Randall S. Schuler, E. Levanoni.

[quads id=5]

Purpose

The primary purpose of this measure is to accurately assess the degree to which an individual experiences conflicting job demands (Role Conflict) and lack of clarity regarding job expectations, methods, and outcomes (Role Ambiguity). This measure was specifically designed to overcome methodological shortcomings observed in predecessor scales by ensuring the items were not inherently confounded with indicators of psychological strain or comfort, thereby improving construct validity.

The scale provides researchers and practitioners with distinct subscales for measuring these two critical organizational constructs, which are widely recognized as significant antecedents of negative workplace outcomes such as reduced Job Satisfaction and increased employee turnover.

Construct

This instrument measures two distinct, yet related, constructs central to organizational psychology and stress research: Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity. Role Conflict refers to the simultaneous occurrence of two or more sets of pressures such that compliance with one would make compliance with the others difficult or impossible. In the context of the workplace, this often involves incompatible requests from multiple supervisors or conflict between organizational rules and personal values.

Role Ambiguity is defined as the lack of necessary information available to a role incumbent regarding the role expectations, methods for fulfilling role requirements, or the consequences of role performance. High levels of Role Ambiguity mean the employee lacks clarity regarding goals, responsibilities, scope of authority, and performance evaluation criteria.

Validity

The measure demonstrates strong evidence of convergent and discriminant validity based on correlations with established organizational outcomes. Studies by O’Driscoll & Beehr (1994) and Westman (1992) confirmed that Role Ambiguity correlated positively with several indicators of negative employee experience, including increased Role Conflict, employee uncertainty, psychological strain, turnover intentions, job dissatisfaction, job decision latitude, and employee psychological distress.

Furthermore, both Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict demonstrated the expected negative correlation with overall Job Satisfaction. Research also suggests nuances in the application of the scale, as Harris (1991) provided evidence that the experience of role conflict and ambiguity might be contingent upon whether the sources of these pressures are perceived as external to the individual, indicating that internal sources may be categorized or processed differently by employees.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity subscales is robust across various studies. The reliability, measured using Coefficient Alpha, consistently falls within acceptable to excellent ranges for psychological measures.

Reported Coefficient Alpha values for both the Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity scales ranged from .79 to .86 across different organizational samples (O’Driscoll & Beehr, 1994; Westman, 1992). These figures confirm the homogeneity and stability of the items within each subscale, suggesting that the scales consistently measure the intended constructs.

Factor Analysis

Initial development involved testing a comprehensive pool of 43 items designed to capture various facets of Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity. Through rigorous factor analysis, these items consistently loaded onto two distinct factors, corresponding precisely to the intended constructs. This two-factor structure supports the conceptual distinction between the experience of conflicting demands and the experience of lacking clarity.

The factor structure revealed that the Ambiguity items contained a balanced mix of “stress/comfort” and “self/other” worded statements, mitigating the measurement bias identified in older scales. Conversely, the Conflict factor specifically comprised items worded in terms of stress or pressure caused by other parties, ensuring the measurement focuses on interpersonal or organizational demands rather than internal psychological distress.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report Questionnaire/Psychometric Scale

Format: The scale utilizes a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 represents strongly disagree and 7 represents strongly agree. Items denoted with (R) are reverse scored to control for response bias.

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: Employees/Organizational Workers

Age Group: Adults (Working Population)

Population Details: Developed primarily for use in organizational settings to measure occupational stressors within the workforce.

Test Methodology: Summation of scores across the respective subscales (Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity), with careful attention to reverse-scored items.

Keywords

Organizational Stressors, Job Role, Job Demands, Employee Well-being, Psychometrics, Job Satisfaction, House Scale.

[quads id=5]

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original items were published in the Journal of Applied Psychology in 1983. The items were taken from Table 1, p. 336 of the original publication and are Copyright© 1983 by the American Psychological Association (APA). Researchers should seek permission from the APA for use, especially if commercial application or modification is intended. The scale was developed and validated in 1983.

Reference’s

• House, R. J., Schuler, R. S., & Levanoni, E. (1983). Role conflict and ambiguity scales: Reality or artifacts? Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(2), 334-337.
• O’Driscoll, M. P., & Beehr, T. A. (1994). Role stressors, coping strategies, and psychological strain and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 83-93.
• Westman, M. (1992). The role of social support in the stressor-strain relationship: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65(3), 209-221.
• Harris, S. G. (1991). The effects of perceived source of role ambiguity and conflict on employee outcomes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.

[quads id=5]

Items of the Role Conflict and Ambiguity

Responses are scored on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree.

Role ambiguity items:

1. My authority matches the responsibilities assigned to me (R)
2. I don’t know what is expected of me
3. My responsibilities are clearly defined (R)
4. I feel certain about how much authority I have (R)
5. I know what my responsibilities are (R)
6. I have clear planned goals and objectives for my job (R)
7. The planned goals and objectives are not clear
8. I don’t know how I will be evaluated for a raise or promotion
9. I know what is expected of me (R)
10. Explanations are clear of what has to be done (R)
11. My boss makes it clear how he will evaluate my performance (R)

Role conflict items:

1. I often get myself involved in situations in which there are conflicting requirements.
2. There are unreasonable pressures for better performance
3. I am often asked to do things that are against my better judgment
4. I receive an assignment without adequate resources and materials to execute it
5. I have to buck a rule or policy in order to carry out an assignment
6. I receive incompatible requests from two or more people
7. I have to do things that should be done differently under different conditions.

Items denoted with (R) are reverse scored.