Group Openness/Trust Scale

Abstract

The Group Openness/Trust Scale (GOTS) is a 60-item psychometric instrument developed by Bulach (1993) designed to quantify the levels of openness and trust within a group setting, often applied in educational or organizational contexts. The scale is bipolar, assessing two primary dimensions: group openness and group trust. The measurement is conducted in two distinct phases: the first 30 items capture the individual’s perception of what the group expects of them (expected behavior), while the subsequent 30 items assess the individual’s actual reported behavior within the group (manifest behavior).

The Trust dimension is operationalized through five specific behavioral indicators: character, truthfulness, ability, confidentiality, and predictability. Conversely, the Openness dimension is defined by behaviors related to telling (self-disclosure) and listening (receptivity). Responses are captured using a five-point Likert scale, where higher scores indicate greater levels of perceived or actual openness and trust.

Keywords

Group Openness/Trust Scale, GOTS, group dynamics, organizational trust, interpersonal trust, school climate, educational psychology, psychometrics, group behavior.

Authors

C. Bulach

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Group Openness/Trust Scale (GOTS) is to provide a standardized, quantifiable measure of the crucial psychological constructs of trust and openness as they manifest within defined group structures. Specifically, the scale was developed to assess the interpersonal climate of educational settings, focusing on how individuals perceive expectations and how they consequently behave within their professional groups.

By splitting the scale into two parts—expected behavior and actual behavior—the instrument allows researchers to identify potential discrepancies between the perceived norms of the group and the individual’s reported compliance with those norms. This diagnostic capability is critical for understanding group cohesion, communication barriers, and the overall health of the organizational climate.

Construct

The GOTS is fundamentally a measure of group interpersonal dynamics, structured around two main, theoretically distinct factors: Group Trust and Group Openness.

Group Trust is defined by the degree to which an individual relies upon and feels secure with their colleagues. The underlying components used to assess this construct include:

• Character: The moral and ethical fiber of colleagues.
• Truthfulness: The perceived honesty and sincerity of communication.
• Ability: Confidence in the competence and skill of others.
• Confidentiality: Reliance on others to maintain discretion regarding sensitive information.
• Predictability: The expectation that colleagues will behave consistently under various circumstances.

Group Openness pertains to the free and comfortable exchange of information and feelings within the group. This construct is assessed through two key behavioral dimensions:

• Telling: The willingness of the individual to disclose their ideas, beliefs, and feelings, including constructive criticism.
• Listening: The willingness of the individual to seek out, accept, and process the comments and reactions of others.

The scale’s unique structure, contrasting items based on expected behavior (1–30) versus actual behavior (31–60), provides a nuanced view of the psychological contract between the individual and the group.

Validity

The initial validation of the GOTS involved examining multiple facets of measurement integrity, including content, construct, and discriminant validity. The author, C. Bulach, undertook analyses to ensure the items adequately represented the domains of openness and trust (content validity) and that the scale measured the theoretical constructs it purported to measure (construct validity).

Furthermore, discriminant validity was explored to confirm that the Group Openness scale and the Group Trust scale measured distinct, non-overlapping constructs. Despite these initial efforts, the author explicitly recommended that additional, rigorous empirical research be conducted to further establish and solidify the validity and generalizability of the GOTS across diverse populations and settings.

Reliability

The reliability of the GOTS was assessed using two standard psychometric methods: split-half analysis and test-retest procedures, demonstrating acceptable levels of internal consistency and temporal stability for both subscales.

The internal consistency was measured using the Spearman-Brown split-half reliability coefficient. The results indicated strong internal agreement among items within each factor:

• Group Openness: 0.80
• Group Trust: 0.82

Test-retest reliability, assessing stability over time, was calculated using a sample of 50 graduate students over a one-week interval. The coefficients confirmed the scale’s stability:

• Group Openness: 0.78
• Group Trust: 0.80

These coefficients suggest that the GOTS provides consistent measurements of both group openness and group trust.

Factor Analysis

While the original source confirms that construct validity was examined, specific details regarding a formal exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis (EFA or CFA) are not explicitly provided. However, the foundational structure of the GOTS is clearly designed to measure two principal factors—Openness and Trust—each composed of specific, related behavioral components, indicating an underlying theoretical factor structure guiding the instrument’s design.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychological scale measuring group climate and interpersonal dynamics.

Format: 60 items administered using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

Language Available: English (based on the original publication).

Population Group: Professionals and staff within organizational groups, initially focused on educational personnel.

Age Group: Adult (specifically applied to school staff and graduate students).

Population Details: The initial standardization sample consisted of 525 persons drawn from 24 elementary schools located in Kentucky, USA.

Test Methodology: The scale uses two distinct sets of 30 items to capture both perceived group expectations and reported actual behavior regarding openness and trust.

Keywords

Interpersonal relationships, organizational behavior, self-disclosure, group cohesion, psychological testing, educational staff, Spearman-Brown, test-retest reliability.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in original source documentation.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in original source documentation.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in original source documentation.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1993

Permissions and Fees: Information regarding current licensing, permissions, or associated fees is not available in the original publication abstract. Researchers should contact the author or publisher of People and Education for usage rights.

Reference’s

Bulach, C. (1993). A measure of openness and trust. People and Education 1:382–92.

Bulach, C. R., and Malone, B. (1994). The relationship of school climate to the implementation of school reform. ERS Spectrum: Journal of School Research and Information 12:3–9.

Gurtman, M. B. (1992). Trust, distrust, and interpersonal problems: A circumplex analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62:989–1002.

Pareek, U. (1989). Motivational analysis of organizations—climate (MAO-C). In J. W. Pfeiffer (ed.), The 1989 annual developing human resources. San Diego, CA: University Associates.

Rotter, J. B. (1991). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. In J. P. Robinson, et al. (eds.), Measures of personality and psychological attitudes. New York: Academic Press.

Items of the Group Openness/Trust Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

The scoring utilizes a five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Higher scores indicate higher trust or openness (positive), and lower scores indicate lower trust or openness (negative).

I have gotten the impression that they expect me to

1. tell them what they think of the way they do things.
2. tell them what I think of their ideas.
3. tell them what I think of their educational values and beliefs.
4. share my feelings with them.
5. ask them what they think of the way I do things.
6. ask them what they think of my ideas.
7. ask them what they think of my beliefs and values.
8. ask them about their feelings.
9. accept their comments and reactions.
10. openly disagree with them if I don’t agree with what is being said or done.
11. share positive thoughts with them instead of keeping them to myself.
12. share constructive criticism with them instead of keeping it to myself.
13. believe what I hear them say.
14. question their intentions and/or motives.
15. conceal my true feelings about what they do or say.
16. “play it cool”—keep my distance.
17. count on them for assistance if I have a problem.
18. have faith in their ability.
19. believe that they care about me.
20. deal with them directly when there is a problem.
21. tell them interesting information I know about someone.
22. believe they will respond favorably in a given situation when my welfare is at stake.
23. rely on them to keep a confidence.
24. believe that they are honest.
25. count on them to do what they say they are going to do.
26. tell the truth when it needs to be told.
27. respect the opinions of my colleagues.
28. admit my mistakes and/or problems when necessary.
29. support their ideas, decisions, and actions.
30. believe that they will behave consistently regardless of the person or situation, or my level of stress.

The following items assess actual behavior:

31. I tell them what I think of the way they do things.
32. I tell them what I think of their ideas.
33. I tell them what I think of their educational values and beliefs.
34. I share my feelings with them.
35. I ask them what they think of the way I do things.
36. I ask them what they think of my ideas.
37. I ask them what they think of my educational beliefs and values.
38. I ask them about their feelings.
39. I accept their comments and reactions.
40. I openly disagree if I don’t agree with what is being said or done.
41. I share positive thoughts with them instead of keeping them to myself.
42. I share constructive criticism with them instead of keeping it to myself.
43. I believe what I hear them say.
44. I question their intentions and/or motives.
45. I conceal my true feelings to what they do or say.
46. I “play it cool”—keep my distance from them.
47. I count on them for assistance if I have a problem.
48. I have faith in their ability to help me.
49. I believe that they care about me.
50. I deal with them directly when there is a problem.
51. I tell them interesting information I know about someone.
52. I expect them to respond favorably in a given situation when my welfare is at stake.
53. I rely on them to keep a confidence.
54. I believe that they are honest.
55. I count on them to do what they say they are going to do.
56. I tell the truth when it needs to be told.
57. I respect the opinions of my colleagues.
58. I admit my mistakes and/or problems when necessary.
59. I support the ideas, decisions, and actions of my colleagues.
60. I behave consistently regardless of the person or situation, or my level of stress.