Abstract

The validity of organizational research relies on strong research methods, which include effective measurement of psychological constructs. The general consensus is that multiple item measures have better psychometric properties than single-item measures. However, due to practical constraints (e.g., survey length, respondent burden) there are situations in which certain single items may be useful for capturing information about constructs that might otherwise go unmeasured. We evaluated 37 items, including 18 newly developed items as well as 19 single items selected from existing multiple-item scales based on psychometric characteristics, to assess 18 constructs frequently measured in organizational and occupational health psychology research. We examined evidence of reliability; convergent, discriminant, and content validity assessments; and test-retest reliabilities at 1- and 3-month time lags for single-item measures using a multistage and multisource validation strategy across 3 studies, including data from N = 17 occupational health subject matter experts and N = 1,634 survey respondents across 2 samples. Items selected from existing scales generally demonstrated better internal consistency reliability and convergent validity, whereas these particular new items generally had higher levels of content validity. We offer recommendations regarding when use of single items may be more or less appropriate, as well as 11 items that seem acceptable, 14 items with mixed results that might be used with caution due to mixed results, and 12 items we do not recommend using as single-item measures. Although multiple-item measures are preferable from a psychometric standpoint, in some circumstances single-item measures can provide useful information.