Validation of Interpersonal relationship scale inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis modelling approach using AMOS.

Validation of Interpersonal relationship scale inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis modelling approach using AMOS. | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Validation of Interpersonal relationship scale inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis modelling approach using AMOS. Sumit Kumar Debnath, Puja Khatri This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3813602/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Interpersonal relationships are crucial for the growth and development of the organization as it directly or indirectly impacts employee performance. The present study aimed to develop an interpersonal relationship scale inventory for nurses, identifying the various dimensions of interpersonal relationships and validating the developed scale using EFA and CFA approaches. A methodological cross-sectional study design consisting of two phases was used. The study was conducted in government and private-sector hospitals. In the first phase, 250 nurses participated in the study, and 4 factors with 16 items were identified using EFA. In the second phase, confirmatory factor analysis was performed with a sample size of 766 nurses. Information related to factor loading (EFA), descriptive statistic, correlation matrix, standardized estimation in the CFA model, and discriminant validity were presented in tabular form. Data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 and AMOS 23.0. The result indicated that the CFA model was ascertained by the following indices: CFI =0.973; GFI= 0.958; RMSEA= 0.048; TLI= 0.967; SRMR= 0.033. The results were within the acceptable range, indicating that the four factors obtained from EFA were validated, also the reliability and the discriminant validity of the model were established. Moreover, the study shows that the four factors identified were regarded as crucial element that supports the interpersonal relationship scale developed in the study. The four-factor scale can be used by nursing managers, and educators to understand the competencies of nurses towards people management, which have a significant impact on patient outcomes. Also, the scale would be helpful in assessing the effectiveness of the training program to measure the social skills and competencies of the nurses, hence there exist a significant implication of this study. The study concludes with the validation of the four-factor interpersonal relationship scale inventory which can be a useful tool to assess workplace relationships for healthcare professionals. As a future scope, the researcher can validate the scale using different sample frames. Nurses Interpersonal relationship Exploratory factor analysis Confirmatory factor analysis AMOS Figures Figure 1 1. Introduction Every aspect of hospital efficiency is affected by nurses, who are the foundation of patient care. The patient experience, patient health, and the hospital's overall success are having a direct impact on the nurse's clinical performance (Watanabe, et al. , 2015). It was observed that hospital nurses' concerns with dissatisfaction have increased. This unhappiness is also a result of improper communication, which includes active listening, empathy, and authenticity, as well as interpersonal issues (Perry, et al., 2018 ). In order to feel comfortable at work, it is considered essential for nurses to communicate with one another and engage in positive interpersonal interactions and social engagement. Patient safety is being threatened by medical errors and adverse results resulting from poor communication between healthcare professionals. Research demonstrates that interpersonal relationships and other human elements have an impact on healthcare providers' ability to communicate. As a result, varied interpersonal interactions among team members lead to distinct interpersonal behaviors, which, in turn, alter team communication and affect patient safety outcomes (Lee and Doran, 2017 ). The research also shows that good communication mediates the association between ethical leadership and the followers' trust in the leader. The study also highlights the necessity for supervisor training in successful interpersonal skills, which is a crucial component of relationships and ultimately raises followers' trust in leaders (Rajesh and Suganti, 2016). Nursing education is experiencing difficulties, just like the other professional education streams in the nation. These difficulties included a scarcity of competent nurses (both in terms of quality and quantity), as well as a shortage of curricula that satisfies the requirements of the present healthcare industry and its clients. The principles of effectiveness, interpersonal communication, patient safety, multidisciplinary collaboration, and technological exposure are not taught in all curricula. Clinical expertise, social awareness, and ethical commitment are qualities that nurses should possess. Therefore, it can be concluded that professional self-concept significantly correlated positively with interpersonal interaction, clinical setting involvement, and coping strategy. Programs that support healthy self-concept development, including interpersonal relationships and coping, are therefore necessary (Yoo and Choi, 2019 ). In order to offer excellent patient care, hospital nurses interact and communicate with other members of the healthcare team (Doran et al., 2002 ). Lack of verbal communication and poor interpersonal relations between staff members has been determined to be the cause of 37% of all mistakes (Donchin, et al., 1995 ). Hence, the objective of the present study was to understand the various dimensions of interpersonal relationships and to develop a scale to measure the same. Although a review of the literature identified certain instruments that measure the interpersonal relationship, none has been developed in the context of Indian nursing (Garthoeffner et al., 1993 ; Guerney, 1977 ; Horowitz et al., 1988 ; Nielsen et al., 2000 , Rubin et al., 1988 ). Since the focus of the current study was on nurses, hence the data were collected exclusively from nurses to develop the interpersonal relationship scale inventory. 2. Literature review According to the social exchange theory, relationships between people persist because they exchange different resources (Vogli, 2010 ). According to research, interactions between leaders and followers have a significant influence on job engagement, which in turn influences how well employees accomplish their tasks. Therefore, the organization must focus on these factors, which finally result in employee happiness and a better workplace (Monika, 2019 ). Additionally, it was discovered that the perceived costs and benefits of the relationship influenced the mentor and mentee's participating behaviors. Furthermore, the density of relationships inside an organization has a significant impact on its effectiveness. Moreover, it was discovered that workplace disorder negatively impacts interpersonal interactions, which in turn makes workers feel demotivated (Monux, et al., 2014 ). Thus, creating a communication plan is essential for addressing issues with superiors and coworkers. The development of nursing with a view to its humanization depends on the components of interpersonal relationships, usually requiring ongoing training of nurses involved in the care process, not only in technical procedures but especially in their improved preparation for the development of healthy interpersonal relationships, trained as competent care resources (Borges, et al., 2017 ). Additionally, it can be said that empathy would be improved by interpersonal support systems and self-esteem. Additionally, encouraging support, motivation, interactions, and strategies will boost nurses' sense of self, interpersonal abilities, and intuition (Kim, 2018 ). Interpersonal relationships are essential to the satisfaction of professional lives. Significant determinants of job happiness include social and professional relations. It was discovered that three aspects of interpersonal relationships i.e., personal attachment, credibility, and communication, help people build strategic alliances (Wang et al., 2018 ). The study also shows that interpersonal problems and emotional stress have a significant effect on one's perception of one's professional self. In order to improve the skills and professional self-concepts of nurses, the organization should develop strategies to lessen interpersonal difficulties and emotional function (Yeom, 2017 ). According to research, employees' perceptions of uncertain behaviour were exquisitely preserved by organizational conformity. Additional findings indicate that interpersonal relationships at work are based on and fostered by amorphous deception on the part of employees, dishonesty on the part of managers, and organizational obscurantism (Baloch et al., 2019 ). Additionally, it was discovered that the correlation between psychological growth and communication satisfaction in the superior-subordinate relationship is mediated by relational maintenance behaviour (Goldman and Goodboy, 2017 ). Therefore, psychological growth is crucial for enhancing the partnership. According to a study by Liew et al. ( 2018 ), healthy peer relationships mediated the relationship between early performance and resiliency, meaning that persons with high levels of resiliency are more likely to have better interpersonal relationships that are cordial and low in conflict. Studies showed that effective leadership has a large direct impact on task alignment and organizational engagement as well as a considerable indirect impact on staff resilience. Engaged staff will aid businesses in increasing productivity. The most reliable indicator of involvement with nurses in practice has been interpersonal ties. Consequently, workplaces that foster good interpersonal ties can improve nurses' job effectiveness (Singh and Rangnekar, 2020 ). Relationships with people and organizational stresses were discovered to be significant contributors to distress in nurses, including mental illness. It might be argued that organizational support interventions and enhancing the caliber of workplace relationships can increase employees' general well-being. Nursing care is significantly influenced by a nurse's and nursing associate's mutual understanding, enjoyment, and social interaction (Burtson and Stichler, 2010 ). According to a study by Penckofer, et al. ( 2011 ), managing the therapeutic relationship between the nurse and patient is significantly impacted by the trust. Nurses support patients in reducing their anxiety, which has a significant impact on the patient's outcome. Supportive nursing management positively impacts patient care, employee happiness, and decreased desire to leave (Bogaert and Kowalski, 2013 ). Additionally, it was discovered that unprofessional interactions at work directly affect nurses' emotional well-being and productivity at work (Han, et al., 2015 ). As a result, nurses who participate in anger management education programs can express previously repressed feelings, which in turn helps them deal with interpersonal problems more effectively and improve interpersonal relationships. Additionally, a collaborative work environment has an impact on the nursing manager's job involvement and proactive work behavior (Warshawsky, et al., 2012 ). Effective relationships required understanding the equal value of each team member's contribution to patient care as well as a clear understanding of each person's role on the team. According to the study, effective communication skills and active listening could promote cross-disciplinary cooperation and teamwork (Espinoza et al. , 2018). The study also demonstrates that friendly and subservient interpersonal behaviour reduces emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. Emotional exhaustion and disengagement would rise if interpersonal interaction were increasingly dominated by dominance. Therefore, people's cooperative, subservient behaviour can help to enhance interpersonal relationships (Martinez-Zaragoza, 2017 ). Since relationship management is one of the key components of emotional intelligence, it has been found that emotional intelligence has a favourable effect on stress and burnout reduction, which further promotes job retention and improves individual well-being (Afsar, et al., 2017 ). Further, the improvement of interpersonal relationships at work can be achieved through improved organizational structure, communication methods, and mentoring. 3. Methodology The objective of the study was to develop and validate the interpersonal relationship scale inventory. The development of the “Interpersonal Relationship (IPR) Scale” used a cross-sectional methodological study design consisting of two phases: (1) In the first phase of the study, researchers used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) approaches to identify the various dimensions of interpersonal relationship (2) and in the second phase, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to establish and validate the psychometric property of the instrument. Phase I : The first step in this phase was to understand the concept of interpersonal relationships and to identify its dimensions and its relevance to the nurses. The items were designed based on the review of the literature, and by conducting semi-structured interviews with 20 nurses. The initial questionnaire consists of 65 items based on five points Likert scale: Never, Rarely, Sometime, Often, Always. The instruction on the scale was “Kindly mark your perception regarding your relationship with your colleague in your organization”. Finally, the content of each item was also examined by two nursing educators. Based on the opinion of the experts, six items were dropped and finally, 59 items were obtained for the study. A sample of 250 registered nurses working in government and private hospitals was selected based on the proportionate sampling method. The eligibility criteria include that the nurses should be working in a hospital with a minimum of 100 beds and above. The questionnaires were provided to the ward in-charges of each department who in turn distributed them to the nurses for completion. Factor analysis was performed on the collected data using SPSS 22.0 and the results were presented in the tabular form. Phase II In the study’s second phase, the factors obtained from EFA were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS 23.0. A sample of 766 nurses was finally considered for the purpose of the scale validation and the results were presented accordingly. The developed instrument consists of two sections, ie. the demographic profile and the information related to measuring interpersonal relationships which consist of 16 items based on the EFA. The scale was measured on a 5-point liker scale (1 = Never; 2 = Rarely; 3 = Sometime; 4 = Often; 5 = Always). 3.1 Demographic details For phase 1 of the study, out of 250 respondents, 4% (n = 9) were males and 96% (n = 241) were females; 57% (n = 143) belong to the age group 20–30 yrs.; 23% (n = 57) to age group 31–40 yrs.; 14% (n = 35) to age group 41–50 yrs.; and 6% (n = 15) above 50 yrs. Moreover, 53% (n = 132) of respondents were graduates; 6% (n = 15) were post-graduate, and 41% (n = 103) were diploma holders. In study 2, out of 766 respondents, 645 (84.2%) were female and 121 (15.7%) were males. Moreover, the majority of the respondents ie. 345 (45%) belong to the 20-30yrs of age group, whereas 249(32.5%) belong to 31-40yrs, 120 (15.7%) fall into 41-50yrs and 52 (6.8%) in the age group more than 50years. In terms of educational qualification, 380(49.6%) of respondents were graduates, 64(8.4%) were postgraduate and 322(42%) diploma holders. In terms of experience 315(41.1%) respondents were below 5 years of experience, 152(19.8%) had experience of 5–10 years, 163(21.3%) had experience of 10–15 years, 77(10.1%) respondents had experience of 15–20 years and 59(7.7%) were more than 20 years of experience. Concerning the designation of respondents, 135(17.6%) belong to the senior nursing category and 631(82.4%) belong to the junior nursing category. 4. Data analysis Data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 and AMOS 23.0 statistical software. For study 1 Exploratory factor analysis was conducted by principal component analysis using Varimax rotation with the Kaiser Normalization method. The correlation coefficients between the factors were presented in tabular form. As recommended by Chou and Bentler ( 1995 ), the first step involves identifying the normal standard distribution by verifying that the kurtosis (< 7) and skewness (< 2) were in the acceptable range. First-order confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for study 2 using AMOS 23.0 to validate the factors obtained as a result of EFA. Various fit indices such as Chi-square goodness of fit (p > 0.05), CFI > 0.95, TLI > 0.95, SRMR 0.95 and RMSEA 0.70; AVE > 0.50; CR > AVE). Table I: KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.832 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 820.486 Df 105 Sig. 0.000 Table II: Varimax Rotated Component Matrix for Interpersonal Relationships at Workplace Items Components 1 2 3 4 Team management IRA1 .704 IRA2 .684 IRA3 .661 IRA4 .642 IRA5 .618 IRA6 .564 Emotion management IRB1 .787 IRB2 .704 IRB3 .564 IRB4 .557 Social management IRC1 .722 IRC2 .600 IRC3 .518 Politic management IRD1 .769 IRD2 .658 IRD3 .691 Eigen Value 4.220 1.605 1.167 1.039 % Of variance 53.546% Table III: Descriptive statistic: study 1 (mean and standard deviation) (n = 250) Item code Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis IRA1 3.81 1.166 − .722 − .300 IRA2 4.09 .996 − .850 − .171 IRA3 3.71 1.056 − .569 − .106 IRA4 3.73 1.167 − .641 − .321 IRA5 3.73 1.181 − .578 − .649 IRA6 3.77 1.151 − .611 − .466 IRB1 3.44 1.122 − .271 − .500 IRB2 3.35 1.081 − .238 − .608 IRB3 3.26 1.148 − .105 − .677 IRB4 3.65 1.092 − .738 .147 IRC1 3.34 1.162 − .127 − .847 IRC2 3.32 1.076 − .237 − .425 IRC3 3.57 1.164 − .515 − .486 IRD1 3.25 1.110 − .237 − .402 IRD2 2.24 1.277 .735 − .602 IRD3 3.61 1.295 − .637 − .654 4.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis According to the recommendation of Tabachnick and Fidell ( 2014 ), ignoring factor loading with an absolute value of less than 0.3 (representing 10% of the shared variance). The Kaiser- Meyer- Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test illustrate that the data were appropriate for factor analysis (KMO index = 0.832, Chi-square = 820.486, p < 0.001) (See Table I). An average value of KMO above 0.6 is acceptable for a sample less than 100, and an average value between 0.5 and 0.6 is acceptable for a sample size between 100 and 200 (MacCallum et al., 1999 ). Principal component analysis using Varimax rotation results in four factors with eigenvalues greater than 01 and sixteen items with factor loading greater than or equal to 0.4, which accounted for 53.546% of the total variance explained. The proportion of the total variance explained by the retained factors should be at least 50% (Streiner, 1994 ). The four factors are as follows: Team management (6 items), Emotion management (4 items), Social management (3 items), and Politic management (3 items) as shown in Table II. Reliability was measured using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and it was found to be 0.783 for the whole scale which was above the minimum acceptable value as recommended by Wells and Wollack ( 2003 ). Correlation coefficients between the four factors were ranging from 0.343 to 0.620. The correlation coefficient between Politics management (IRD) and Team management (IRA) was found to be the highest i.e. 0.620, which shows there is a high positive correlation between these two factors. The other factor has a moderate correlation coefficient between 0.275–0.490 which shows the factors had correlations but do not overlap with each other. With respect to the descriptive statistics, the sixteen items were measured by mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis (Table: III). The mean range of the items varies from 2.24 to 4.09 and the standard deviation varies from 0.996 to 1.295. The skewness ranged from − 0.105 to 0.735, and kurtosis ranged from − 0.106 to 0.147. Table IV: Correlation matrix of the factors in the CFA model (Study 2) IRA IRB IRC IRD IRA 1 IRB .539 ** 1 IRC .540 ** .488 ** 1 IRD .390 ** .331 ** .349 ** 1 ** p < 0.01 Table V: Standardized estimate in the CFA model Factors Item code Estimates Factor 1 IRA1 0.74 ** IRA2 0.76 ** IRA3 0.82 ** IRA4 0.84 ** IRA5 0.80 ** IRA6 0.81 ** Factor 2 IRB1 0.68 ** IRB2 0.79 ** IRB3 0.77 ** IRB4 0.76 ** Factor 3 IRC1 0.79 ** IRC2 0.81 ** IRC3 0.71 ** Factor 4 IRD1 0.81 ** IRD2 0.75 ** IRD3 0.78 ** ** p < 0.01 4.2 Confirmatory factor analysis Cross-validation of the identified four factors was conducted using CFA. There was a positive correlation between the factors, with estimates ranging from r = 0.331 to r = 0.539, and there was a significant relationship among the factors (Table IV). The result presented in table V shows the standardized estimates of the 16 items which ranged from β = 0.68 to β = 0.84 (p < 0.001). Figure 1 presents the model with the standardized estimate. The Chi-square goodness of fit statistic was not statistically significant (χ 2 = 270.416, d.f = 98, p = 0.000). Since Chi-square is extremely sensitive to the model fit and tends to reject the model when the sample or model is large (Bentler and Bonett, 1980 ). Due to the limitation of the Chi-square, other multiple indices were used to assess the model fit ie. CFI, GFI, TLI, and RMSEA, indicated that the model was supported by most of the indices. In the present model, the various indices were as follows: CFI = 0.973; GFI = 0.958; RMSEA = 0.048; TLI = 0.967; SRMR = 0.033. These results were found to be within the acceptable range, which shows that the four factors obtained from the EFA were validated. Table VI: Discriminant validity, CR, and AVE of the CFA model (Fornel and Larker Criterion) CR AVE MSV MaxR(H) IRB IRA IRC IRD IRB 0.839 0.566 0.366 0.844 0.752 IRA 0.911 0.630 0.379 0.913 0.605 0.794 IRC 0.812 0.591 0.379 0.818 0.588 0.616 0.768 IRD 0.825 0.612 0.196 0.828 0.385 0.443 0.421 0.782 Moreover, the convergent and the discriminant validity of the model was also established as shown in table VI. The AVE of the constructs was above the threshold value ie > .50. The convergent validity of the model was established as CR > 0.70, AVE > 0.50, and CR > AVE (Brown and Moore, 2012 ). Since the square root of AVE was found to be greater than the correlation coefficient of the other constructs. Hence discriminant validity of the model was established. 5. Discussion and conclusion Most of the interpersonal relationship measurement scale has been developed focusing primarily on intimate and close personal relationships (Guerney, 1977 ). In addition, several scholars have used the modification of the scales to study the relationship of premarital or married couples (Gordon and Waldo, 1984 ; Heitland, 1986 ; Jessee and Guerney, 1981 ). Also, the nurse-nurse collaboration scale developed by Dougherty and Larson ( 2010 ), measures organizational climate, focusing on communication, coordination, problem-solving, and conflict management and these categories have been adapted from the ICU nurse-physician questionnaire developed by Shortell et al. ( 1991 ). Some of the studies also focus on the relationship between nurse and physician as a part of the organizational assessment method or as a subset of a larger construct (Sasagara, et al. 2003 ; Vazirani et al., 2005 ). Nurses are aware that they collaborate at work utilizing team management, emotion management, social management, and political management since the four elements established from the exploratory factor analysis have been validated. The management of the nurses' interpersonal relationships depends on each of the constructs to some extent. The sub-construct "team management" highlights the significance of working in a team, including supporting team members, building trust and a sense of community among co-workers, and collaborating with individuals from various cultural backgrounds. The ability of the nurses to regulate their emotions and deal with challenges and difficult circumstances sensibly is indicated by the sub-construct "emotion management." The sub-construct "politics management" clarifies the capacity of nurses in managing work responsibility and using relationships for material benefits, while the sub-construct "social management" focuses on aspects such as handling personal commitment and maintaining cordial relationships with colleagues. The results show that the various sub-constructs are regarded as a crucial element that supports the interpersonal relationship scale developed during the study. Additionally, since it is a multidimensional scale, each dimension can be utilized separately as a scale (DeVellis, 1991 ). 6. Managerial implication In the context of the nurse-nurse interaction in India, interpersonal relationships are a less discussed area in the healthcare sector (Bogaert and Kowalski, 2013 ; Kim, 2018 ; Robson and Robson, 2016 ; Sarah, 2005 ). Studies are largely based on interactions between patients and nurses. It is sad for the future of academia and industry that there is so little quantitative research in this area. In addition, a severe lack of healthcare workers combined with a heavy workload leads to stress, emotional weariness, and burnout, all of which have a negative influence on patient care and safety (Pino and Rossini, 2012 ). The goal of the current research study was to comprehend how crucial interpersonal relationships are at work for an organization's growth. The following are the study's implications: Since the study addresses the association and relevance of various factors of interpersonal relationships at the workplace. Hence, the healthcare sector will be benefitted by knowing the elements of interpersonal relationships at the workplace and the variables influencing them in detail and also aid organizations to design an appropriate training program for their employees. Researcher would like to give recommendations to the governing bodies to keep in place such practices that can boost the level of interpersonal relationships of the nursing staff which in turn will be more beneficial for organizational development and patient care. The findings of the research can also inform the researcher and the potential employer in terms of recruiting nurses with an acceptable level of required social skills and training them accordingly to prove patient-centric care. A study by Kornhaber, et al., ( 2016 ) suggests that, primarily among younger and less experienced employees, exhaustion and burnout were found to have an indirect impact on nursing care. As a result, nursing managers have to change direction from educational intervention to a sense of social belonging. Clinical interpersonal relationships are the main element of all healthcare facilities that can be further enhanced by listening and responding to the person’s feelings. Relationship issues are also severely influenced by interpersonal problems such as employee emotional stress and inadequate communication (Howard and Shaw, 2011 ). By recognizing and communicating these concerns as well as obtaining the right leadership support, these interpersonal challenges can be further addressed. 7. Conclusion The study concludes with the validation of the 16-item scale to measure interpersonal relationships at the workplace. Moreover, the scale demonstrates acceptable reliability and validity. It can be said that work-related productivity is severely affected by people’s mental health. Most of the studies indicate that mental illness causes symptoms such as pain and stress and it lowers productivity at the workplace which has a direct impact on their family and social relationship (Vasconcelos et al. 2016 ). Despite understanding that many aspects contribute to the nursing professional’s health risk, the administrators are neglecting the proactive measures and care for the same. The study has provided insight into the various dimensions of interpersonal relations in the context of health care professionals (nurses). The four-factor scale can be used by nursing managers, and educators to understand the competencies of nurses towards people management, which have a significant impact on patient outcomes. Also, the scale would be helpful in assessing the effectiveness of the training program to measure the social skills and competencies of the nurses. 8. Limitations and suggestions for future research Since the study exclusively examined the nurse-nurse relationship, also the study's participating nurses were restricted to hospitals in the Delhi region of India. Hence, the place significance of the study imposes a restriction on its ability to be generalized. Additionally, the researcher can validate the scale using samples from other sectors. Also, the relationship of scale with the other psychological variable can also be explored as a future scope of study so as to find its significant impact on better workplace management. Declarations Funding: No financial grant was obtained for this study. Conflicts of interest/Competing interests: The author declares that there is no conflict of interest. Ethics approval: The present research was a part of the doctoral research of the first author. Hence, prior ethical approval was granted by the doctoral committee, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi (India) to pursue this study from the institution where the researcher was registered. Consent to participate: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. About the authors Dr. Sumit Kumar Debnath is working as an Asst. Professor at Ideal Institute of Management and Technology affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi. His keen research areas include organization behavior, and human resource management. Sumit Kumar Debnath is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Prof. Puja Khatri is currently working as a Professor at the University School of Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi. She has a Ph.D. degree in organizational behavior and higher education. She has published more than 90 research papers and articles in journals of national and international repute and in proceedings of national and international conferences. Dr. Shweta Nanda is currently working as Associate Professor, Amity University, Noida. References Afsar B, Cheema S and Masood M. (2017) ‘The role of emotional dissonance and emotional intelligence on job-stress, burnout and well-being among nurses.’ International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management , Vol.9 (2). DOI: 10.1504/IJISCM.2017.087952 Baloch R S, Baloch A R and Shar A A. (2019) ‘Organisational obscurantism: synthesising prosocial lies with interpersonal relationship at workplace.’ International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion , Volume 10 (2). DOI: 10.1504/IJWOE.2019.104298 Bentler, P. M., and Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological bulletin , 88 (3), 588. Bogaert, P. and Kowalski, C. (2013) ‘The relationship between nurse practice environment, nurse work characteristics, burnout and job outcome and quality of nursing care: A cross-sectional survey’, International Journal of Nursing Studies , Vol. 50, No. 12, pp.1667–1677. Borges JWP, Moreira TMM and Andrade DF. (2017) ‘Nursing Care Interpersonal Relationship Questionnaire: elaboration and validation.’ Revista Latino -Americana de Enfermagem , Vol. 25:e2962. DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.2128.2962 Brown, T. A. and Moore, M. T. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis. Handbook of structural equation modeling , 361 , 379. Burtson, P.L. and Stichler, J.F. (2010) ‘Nursing work environment and nurse caring: relationship among motivational factors’, Journal of Advanced Nursing , Vol. 66(8), pp.1819–1831. Chou, C. P. and Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. DeVellis, R.F. (1991) Scale development: Theory and Applications (Ed. P.1-113), Sage Publication, Newbury Park. Donchin Y, Gopher D, Olin M et al.(1995) ‘A look into the nature and cause of human errors in the intensive care unit’, Critical care medicine , Vol. 23(2), pp.294-300. Doran D, Sidani S, Keatings M and Doidge D. (2002) ‘An empirical test of the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model’, Journal of Advance Nursing, Vol. 38(1), pp.29-39. Dougherty MB and Larson EL. (2010) ‘The nurse-nurse collaboration scale’, Journal of Nursing Administration , Vol. 40(1), 17-25. Espinoza et.al. (2018) ‘Interprofessional team member’s satisfaction: a mixed methods study of a Chilean hospital.’ Human Resources for Health , Vol. 16(30).DOI: 10.1186/s12960-018-0290-z Garthoeffner J. L., Henry C. S., and Robinson L. C. (1993) ‘The modified interpersonal relationship scale: Reliability and Validity’, Psychological Reports , Vol. 73, 995-1004. Goldman, Z.W. and Goodboy, A. K. (2017) ‘Explaining doctoral student’s relational maintenance with their advisor: a psychosocial development perspective’, Communication Education , Vol. 66(1), pp.70-89. Gordon S and Waldo M (1984) ‘The effects of assertiveness training on couple’s relationships’, The American Journal of Family Therapy , Vol. 12, No. pp.73-77. DOI: 10.1080/01926188408250160 Guerney, B. G. (1977) Relationship enhancement: skill training programs for therapy, problem prevention, and enrichment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Han, A., Won, J., Kim, O. and Lee, S.E. (2015) ‘Anger Expression Types and Interpersonal Problems in Nurses’, Asian Nursing Research , Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 146-151. Heitland W (1986) ‘An experimental communication program for premarital dating couples’, The School Counselor , Vol. 34, No. 1, pp.57-61. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J.and Mullen, M. (2008, September). Evaluating model fit: a synthesis of the structural equation modelling literature. In 7th European Conference on research methodology for business and management studies (pp. 195-200). Horowitz, L.M., Rosenberg, S.E., Baer, B.A. and Valerie, S. (1988) ‘Inventory of interpersonal problems: Psychometric properties and clinical applications’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , Vol. 56(6), pp.885-892 Howard, J. and Shaw, E. (2011) ‘Up close and (inter)personal: Insights from a primary care practice’s efforts to improve office relationships over time, 2003–2009’, Quality Management in Health Care, Vol. 20(1), pp.49–61. Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal , 6 (1), 1-55. Jessee, R. and Guerney, B.G. (1981) ‘A comparison of Gestalt and relationship enhancement treatments with married couples’, The American Journal of Family Therapy , Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.31-41. Kim, J. (2018) ‘Factors influencing nursing student’s empathy’, Korean Journal of Medical Education , Vol. 30(3), pp.229-236. Kornhaber, R., Walsh, K., Duff, J. and Walker, K. (2016) ‘Enhancing adult therapeutic interpersonal relationships in the acute health care setting: an integrative review’, Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare , Vol. 9, pp.537–546. DOI: 10.2147/jmdh.s116957. Lee CTS and Doran D.M. (2017) ‘The Role of Interpersonal Relations in Healthcare Team Communication and Patient Safety: A Proposed Model of Interpersonal Process in Teamwork.’ Canadian Journal of Nursing Research , Vol. 49(2).DOI: 10.1177/0844562117699349 Liew, J., Cao, Q., Hughes, J.N. and Deutz, M.H.F. (2018) ‘Academic Resilience Despite Early Academic Adversity: A Three-Wave Longitudinal Study on Regulation- Related Resiliency, Interpersonal Relationships, and Achievement in First to Third Grade’, Early Education and Development , Vol. 29(5), pp.762-779. Martinez-Zaragoza F. (2017) ‘Personality and interpersonal behaviour may impact on burnout in nurses.’ Evidence Based Nursing , Vol. 21(1). DOI: 10.1136/eb-2017-102797 Monika R. (2019) ‘Factors influencing work engagement and its impact on task performance’, International Journal of Business Excellence , Vol.17 (1), pp.97 – 129. Monux, Y.R., Juan, L.C., Marcos, A.P. and Sole, M.L. (2014) ‘Interpersonal relationships among hospital nurses and the use of communication skills’, Text Context Nursing, Vol. 23(3), pp.555-62. Nielsen, I.K., Jex, S.M. and Adams, G.A. (2000) ‘Development and Validation of Scores on a Two-Dimensional Workplace Friendship Scale’, Educational and Psychological Measurement , Vol. 60 (4), pp.628-643. Penckofer, S., Byrn, M., Mumby, P., and Ferrans, C. (2011) ‘Improving Subject Recruitment, Retention, and Participation in Research through Peplau’s Theory of Interpersonal Relations’, Nursing Science Quarterly. Vol. 24(2), pp. 146–151. Perry, L., Xu, X., Gallagher, R., Nicholls, R., Sibbritt, D. and Duffield, C. (2018) ‘Lifestyle Health Behaviors of Nurses and Midwives: The ‘Fit for the Future’ Study’, International Journal of Environment Research and Public Health , Vol. 15, p. 945. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15050945 Pino,O. and Rossini,G. (2012) ‘Perceived Organizational Stressors and Interpersonal Relationships as Predictors of Job Satisfaction and Well-Being among Hospital Nurses’, International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 2(6), pp.196-207. Rajesh J.I. and Suganthi L. (2016) ‘The mediating role of interpersonal communication satisfaction between transformational leadership and follower’s trust.’ International Journal of Business Excellence , Vol. 9 (4). DOI: 10.1504/IJBEX.2016.076773 Robson, A., and Robson, F. (2016) ‘Investigation of nurse’s intention to leave: a study of a sample of UK nurses’, Journal of Health Organization and Management , Vol. 30(1), pp. 154-173. Rubin, R.B., Perse, E.M. and Barbato, C.A. (1988) ‘Conceptualization and Measurement of Interpersonal Communication Motives’, Human Communication Research , Vol. 14(4), pp. 602-628. Sarah, S. (2005) ‘Interpersonal relationships and the origins of mental health’ Journal of Public Mental Health , Vol. 4(1), pp. 24-29. Sasagara, T., Miyashita, M. and Kawa, K. (2003) ‘Difficulties encountered by nurses in the care of the terminal cancer patients in general hospitals in Japan’, Palliative Medicine, Vol. 17, pp. 520-526. DOI: 10.1191/0269216303pm802oa. Shortell S.M., Rousseau D, Gillies R, Devers K.J and Simons T.L. (1991) ‘Organisational assessment in intensive care units (ICUs): construct development, reliability, the validity of the ICU nurse-physician collaboration’, Medical Care , Vol. 29(8), pp. 709-23. Singh A. and Rangnekar S. (2020) ‘Enhancing proactivity among hospital employees: a serial mediation model’, International Journal of Business Excellence , Vol. 21(1), pp. 64 – 80. Streiner (1994), ‘Figuring out factors: the use and misuse of factor analysis’, Canadian Journal of Psychiatry , Vol. 39(3), pp.135-140. Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2014), Using Multivariate Statistics. 6 th Ed. Harlow: Pearson. MacCallum, R.C., Widaman, K.F., Zhang, S. and Hong, S. (1999), ‘Sample size in factor analysis’, Psychological Methods , Vol. 4(1), pp. 84-99. Vazirani, S., Hays, R.D., Shapiro, M.F. and Cowan, M. (2005), ‘Effect of a multidisciplinary intervention on communication and collaboration among physicians and nurses’, American Journal of Critical Care , Vol. 14(1), pp. 71-77. Vasconcelos et al . (2016), ‘ Nursing Staff Members Mental’s Health and Factors Associated with the Work Process: An Integrative Review’, Clinical Practice & Epidemiology in Mental Health, Vol. 12, pp. 167-176. Vogli, R. (2010), ‘Social relationship at work and depression’, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health , Vol. 64(8), pp. 652-653. Warshawsky, N., Havens, D. and Knafl, G. (2012), ‘The Influence of Interpersonal Relationships on Nurse Manager’s Work Engagement and Proactive Work Behavior’, Journal of Nursing Adm inistration , Vol. 42(9), pp. 418–425. Watanabe, N et al. (2015), ‘A mindfulness-based stress management program and treatment with omega-3 fatty acids to maintain a healthy mental state in hospital nurses (Happy Nurse Project): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial’, Trials , Vol. 16(36) https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0554-z Wang B, Kang, Y., Childerhouse, P., and Huo, B. (2018) ‘Service supply chain integration: the role of interpersonal relationships’, Industrial Management & Data Systems , Vol. 118(4), pp. 828-849. Wells, C. S., & Wollack, J. A. (2003). An instructor’s guide to understanding test reliability. Testing & Evaluation Services University of Wisconsin . Yeom E-Y. (2017) ‘The Influence of Interpersonal Problems, Emotional Labor on Professional Self-Concept among Clinical Nurses’, Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society , Vol. 18(6), pp.356-365. Yoo, J.H. and Choi, H.J. (2019) ‘A Study on the Relationship between Professional Self-concept, Interpersonal Relationship, Coping, Clinical Practice Satisfaction of Nursing College Students,Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society, Vol. 20(3), pp. 553-561. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3813602","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":275819902,"identity":"14acc7c2-014c-4a72-bf95-b64c1efe6600","order_by":0,"name":"Sumit Kumar Debnath","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5462-5706","institution":"Ideal Institute of Management and Technology","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sumit","middleName":"Kumar","lastName":"Debnath","suffix":""},{"id":275819903,"identity":"f864081c-b615-41a4-9338-21a7839a7782","order_by":1,"name":"Puja Khatri","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Puja","middleName":"","lastName":"Khatri","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2023-12-27 20:05:34","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3813602/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3813602/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":52039520,"identity":"1acdcd14-6dc4-4607-8e60-69193d947b6f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-03-05 17:41:23","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":141939,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCFA model for the Interpersonal relationship scale (standardized estimate).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3813602/v1/c433f0c9f632a2c02223f284.png"},{"id":64983873,"identity":"6193135e-db6a-4729-9bd4-636a338e9f51","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-09-21 11:12:30","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":811022,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3813602/v1/707d765f-a38c-4cf4-a01f-ac8fdd275c7b.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eValidation of Interpersonal relationship scale inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis modelling approach using AMOS.\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEvery aspect of hospital efficiency is affected by nurses, who are the foundation of patient care. The patient experience, patient health, and the hospital's overall success are having a direct impact on the nurse's clinical performance (Watanabe, \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015). It was observed that hospital nurses' concerns with dissatisfaction have increased. This unhappiness is also a result of improper communication, which includes active listening, empathy, and authenticity, as well as interpersonal issues (Perry, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). In order to feel comfortable at work, it is considered essential for nurses to communicate with one another and engage in positive interpersonal interactions and social engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePatient safety is being threatened by medical errors and adverse results resulting from poor communication between healthcare professionals. Research demonstrates that interpersonal relationships and other human elements have an impact on healthcare providers' ability to communicate. As a result, varied interpersonal interactions among team members lead to distinct interpersonal behaviors, which, in turn, alter team communication and affect patient safety outcomes (Lee and Doran, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The research also shows that good communication mediates the association between ethical leadership and the followers' trust in the leader. The study also highlights the necessity for supervisor training in successful interpersonal skills, which is a crucial component of relationships and ultimately raises followers' trust in leaders (Rajesh and Suganti, 2016).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNursing education is experiencing difficulties, just like the other professional education streams in the nation. These difficulties included a scarcity of competent nurses (both in terms of quality and quantity), as well as a shortage of curricula that satisfies the requirements of the present healthcare industry and its clients. The principles of effectiveness, interpersonal communication, patient safety, multidisciplinary collaboration, and technological exposure are not taught in all curricula. Clinical expertise, social awareness, and ethical commitment are qualities that nurses should possess. Therefore, it can be concluded that professional self-concept significantly correlated positively with interpersonal interaction, clinical setting involvement, and coping strategy. Programs that support healthy self-concept development, including interpersonal relationships and coping, are therefore necessary (Yoo and Choi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn order to offer excellent patient care, hospital nurses interact and communicate with other members of the healthcare team (Doran et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Lack of verbal communication and poor interpersonal relations between staff members has been determined to be the cause of 37% of all mistakes (Donchin, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e). Hence, the objective of the present study was to understand the various dimensions of interpersonal relationships and to develop a scale to measure the same. Although a review of the literature identified certain instruments that measure the interpersonal relationship, none has been developed in the context of Indian nursing (Garthoeffner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e; Guerney, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1977\u003c/span\u003e; Horowitz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e; Nielsen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e, Rubin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e). Since the focus of the current study was on nurses, hence the data were collected exclusively from nurses to develop the interpersonal relationship scale inventory.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Literature review","content":"\u003cp\u003eAccording to the social exchange theory, relationships between people persist because they exchange different resources (Vogli, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). According to research, interactions between leaders and followers have a significant influence on job engagement, which in turn influences how well employees accomplish their tasks. Therefore, the organization must focus on these factors, which finally result in employee happiness and a better workplace (Monika, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, it was discovered that the perceived costs and benefits of the relationship influenced the mentor and mentee's participating behaviors. Furthermore, the density of relationships inside an organization has a significant impact on its effectiveness. Moreover, it was discovered that workplace disorder negatively impacts interpersonal interactions, which in turn makes workers feel demotivated (Monux, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, creating a communication plan is essential for addressing issues with superiors and coworkers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe development of nursing with a view to its humanization depends on the components of interpersonal relationships, usually requiring ongoing training of nurses involved in the care process, not only in technical procedures but especially in their improved preparation for the development of healthy interpersonal relationships, trained as competent care resources (Borges, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, it can be said that empathy would be improved by interpersonal support systems and self-esteem. Additionally, encouraging support, motivation, interactions, and strategies will boost nurses' sense of self, interpersonal abilities, and intuition (Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterpersonal relationships are essential to the satisfaction of professional lives. Significant determinants of job happiness include social and professional relations. It was discovered that three aspects of interpersonal relationships i.e., personal attachment, credibility, and communication, help people build strategic alliances (Wang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The study also shows that interpersonal problems and emotional stress have a significant effect on one's perception of one's professional self. In order to improve the skills and professional self-concepts of nurses, the organization should develop strategies to lessen interpersonal difficulties and emotional function (Yeom, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to research, employees' perceptions of uncertain behaviour were exquisitely preserved by organizational conformity. Additional findings indicate that interpersonal relationships at work are based on and fostered by amorphous deception on the part of employees, dishonesty on the part of managers, and organizational obscurantism (Baloch et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, it was discovered that the correlation between psychological growth and communication satisfaction in the superior-subordinate relationship is mediated by relational maintenance behaviour (Goldman and Goodboy, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, psychological growth is crucial for enhancing the partnership.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to a study by Liew et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), healthy peer relationships mediated the relationship between early performance and resiliency, meaning that persons with high levels of resiliency are more likely to have better interpersonal relationships that are cordial and low in conflict.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudies showed that effective leadership has a large direct impact on task alignment and organizational engagement as well as a considerable indirect impact on staff resilience. Engaged staff will aid businesses in increasing productivity. The most reliable indicator of involvement with nurses in practice has been interpersonal ties. Consequently, workplaces that foster good interpersonal ties can improve nurses' job effectiveness (Singh and Rangnekar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRelationships with people and organizational stresses were discovered to be significant contributors to distress in nurses, including mental illness. It might be argued that organizational support interventions and enhancing the caliber of workplace relationships can increase employees' general well-being. Nursing care is significantly influenced by a nurse's and nursing associate's mutual understanding, enjoyment, and social interaction (Burtson and Stichler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). According to a study by Penckofer, et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), managing the therapeutic relationship between the nurse and patient is significantly impacted by the trust.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNurses support patients in reducing their anxiety, which has a significant impact on the patient's outcome. Supportive nursing management positively impacts patient care, employee happiness, and decreased desire to leave (Bogaert and Kowalski, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, it was discovered that unprofessional interactions at work directly affect nurses' emotional well-being and productivity at work (Han, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). As a result, nurses who participate in anger management education programs can express previously repressed feelings, which in turn helps them deal with interpersonal problems more effectively and improve interpersonal relationships. Additionally, a collaborative work environment has an impact on the nursing manager's job involvement and proactive work behavior (Warshawsky, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffective relationships required understanding the equal value of each team member's contribution to patient care as well as a clear understanding of each person's role on the team. According to the study, effective communication skills and active listening could promote cross-disciplinary cooperation and teamwork (Espinoza \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2018). The study also demonstrates that friendly and subservient interpersonal behaviour reduces emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. Emotional exhaustion and disengagement would rise if interpersonal interaction were increasingly dominated by dominance. Therefore, people's cooperative, subservient behaviour can help to enhance interpersonal relationships (Martinez-Zaragoza, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince relationship management is one of the key components of emotional intelligence, it has been found that emotional intelligence has a favourable effect on stress and burnout reduction, which further promotes job retention and improves individual well-being (Afsar, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Further, the improvement of interpersonal relationships at work can be achieved through improved organizational structure, communication methods, and mentoring.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe objective of the study was to develop and validate the interpersonal relationship scale inventory. The development of the \u0026ldquo;Interpersonal Relationship (IPR) Scale\u0026rdquo; used a cross-sectional methodological study design consisting of two phases: (1) In the first phase of the study, researchers used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) approaches to identify the various dimensions of interpersonal relationship (2) and in the second phase, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to establish and validate the psychometric property of the instrument.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003ePhase I\u003c/em\u003e: The first step in this phase was to understand the concept of interpersonal relationships and to identify its dimensions and its relevance to the nurses. The items were designed based on the review of the literature, and by conducting semi-structured interviews with 20 nurses. The initial questionnaire consists of 65 items based on five points Likert scale: Never, Rarely, Sometime, Often, Always. The instruction on the scale was \u0026ldquo;Kindly mark your perception regarding your relationship with your colleague in your organization\u0026rdquo;. Finally, the content of each item was also examined by two nursing educators. Based on the opinion of the experts, six items were dropped and finally, 59 items were obtained for the study. A sample of 250 registered nurses working in government and private hospitals was selected based on the proportionate sampling method. The eligibility criteria include that the nurses should be working in a hospital with a minimum of 100 beds and above. The questionnaires were provided to the ward in-charges of each department who in turn distributed them to the nurses for completion. Factor analysis was performed on the collected data using SPSS 22.0 and the results were presented in the tabular form.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003ePhase II\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the study\u0026rsquo;s second phase, the factors obtained from EFA were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS 23.0. A sample of 766 nurses was finally considered for the purpose of the scale validation and the results were presented accordingly. The developed instrument consists of two sections, ie. the demographic profile and the information related to measuring interpersonal relationships which consist of 16 items based on the EFA. The scale was measured on a 5-point liker scale (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Never; 2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Rarely; 3\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Sometime; 4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Often; 5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Always).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Demographic details\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor phase 1 of the study, out of 250 respondents, 4% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9) were males and 96% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;241) were females; 57% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;143) belong to the age group 20\u0026ndash;30 yrs.; 23% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;57) to age group 31\u0026ndash;40 yrs.; 14% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;35) to age group 41\u0026ndash;50 yrs.; and 6% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) above 50 yrs. Moreover, 53% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;132) of respondents were graduates; 6% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) were post-graduate, and 41% (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;103) were diploma holders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn study 2, out of 766 respondents, 645 (84.2%) were female and 121 (15.7%) were males. Moreover, the majority of the respondents ie. 345 (45%) belong to the 20-30yrs of age group, whereas 249(32.5%) belong to 31-40yrs, 120 (15.7%) fall into 41-50yrs and 52 (6.8%) in the age group more than 50years. In terms of educational qualification, 380(49.6%) of respondents were graduates, 64(8.4%) were postgraduate and 322(42%) diploma holders. In terms of experience 315(41.1%) respondents were below 5 years of experience, 152(19.8%) had experience of 5\u0026ndash;10 years, 163(21.3%) had experience of 10\u0026ndash;15 years, 77(10.1%) respondents had experience of 15\u0026ndash;20 years and 59(7.7%) were more than 20 years of experience. Concerning the designation of respondents, 135(17.6%) belong to the senior nursing category and 631(82.4%) belong to the junior nursing category.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Data analysis","content":"\u003cp\u003eData were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 and AMOS 23.0 statistical software. For study 1 Exploratory factor analysis was conducted by principal component analysis using Varimax rotation with the Kaiser Normalization method. The correlation coefficients between the factors were presented in tabular form. As recommended by Chou and Bentler (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e), the first step involves identifying the normal standard distribution by verifying that the kurtosis (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;7) and skewness (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;2) were in the acceptable range.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst-order confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for study 2 using AMOS 23.0 to validate the factors obtained as a result of EFA. Various fit indices such as Chi-square goodness of fit (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), CFI\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.95, TLI\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.95, SRMR\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.08, GFI\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.95 and RMSEA\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.08 (Hooper et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Hu and Bentler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, convergent and discriminant validity was also established (CR\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.70; AVE\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.50; CR\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;AVE).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable I: KMO and Bartlett's Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.832\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBartlett's Test of Sphericity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eApprox. Chi-Square\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e820.486\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e105\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabb\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable II: Varimax Rotated Component Matrix for Interpersonal Relationships at Workplace\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eItems\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComponents\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTeam management\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.704\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.684\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.661\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.642\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.618\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.564\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion management\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.787\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.704\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.564\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.557\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial management\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.722\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.600\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.518\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolitic management\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.769\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.658\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.691\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEigen Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.220\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.605\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.167\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.039\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% Of variance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53.546%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabc\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable III: Descriptive statistic: study 1 (mean and standard deviation) (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;250)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eItem code\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSkewness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKurtosis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.166\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.722\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.300\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.996\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.850\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.171\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.056\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.569\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.106\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.167\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.641\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.321\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.181\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.578\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.649\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.151\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.611\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.466\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.122\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.271\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.500\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.081\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.238\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.608\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.148\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.105\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.677\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.092\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.738\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.147\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.162\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.127\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.847\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.076\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.237\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.425\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.164\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.515\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.486\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.110\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.237\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.402\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.277\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.735\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.602\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.295\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.637\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.654\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the recommendation of Tabachnick and Fidell (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), ignoring factor loading with an absolute value of less than 0.3 (representing 10% of the shared variance). The Kaiser- Meyer- Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett\u0026rsquo;s test illustrate that the data were appropriate for factor analysis (KMO index\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.832, Chi-square\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;820.486, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (See Table I). An average value of KMO above 0.6 is acceptable for a sample less than 100, and an average value between 0.5 and 0.6 is acceptable for a sample size between 100 and 200 (MacCallum et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). Principal component analysis using Varimax rotation results in four factors with eigenvalues greater than 01 and sixteen items with factor loading greater than or equal to 0.4, which accounted for 53.546% of the total variance explained. The proportion of the total variance explained by the retained factors should be at least 50% (Streiner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). The four factors are as follows: \u003cem\u003eTeam management\u003c/em\u003e (6 items), \u003cem\u003eEmotion management\u003c/em\u003e (4 items), \u003cem\u003eSocial management\u003c/em\u003e (3 items), and \u003cem\u003ePolitic management\u003c/em\u003e (3 items) as shown in Table II. Reliability was measured using Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha coefficient and it was found to be 0.783 for the whole scale which was above the minimum acceptable value as recommended by Wells and Wollack (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). Correlation coefficients between the four factors were ranging from 0.343 to 0.620. The correlation coefficient between Politics management (IRD) and Team management (IRA) was found to be the highest i.e. 0.620, which shows there is a high positive correlation between these two factors. The other factor has a moderate correlation coefficient between 0.275\u0026ndash;0.490 which shows the factors had correlations but do not overlap with each other.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWith respect to the descriptive statistics, the sixteen items were measured by mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis (Table: III). The mean range of the items varies from 2.24 to 4.09 and the standard deviation varies from 0.996 to 1.295. The skewness ranged from \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.105 to 0.735, and kurtosis ranged from \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.106 to 0.147.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabd\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable IV: Correlation matrix of the factors in the CFA model (Study 2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.539\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.540\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.488\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.390\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.331\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.349\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabe\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable V: Standardized estimate in the CFA model\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactors\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eItem code\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEstimates\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactor 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.74\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.76\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.84\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRA6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactor 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.77\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRB4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.76\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactor 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRC3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.71\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactor 4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRD3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.78\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Confirmatory factor analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eCross-validation of the identified four factors was conducted using CFA. There was a positive correlation between the factors, with estimates ranging from r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.331 to r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.539, and there was a significant relationship among the factors (Table IV). The result presented in table V shows the standardized estimates of the 16 items which ranged from β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.68 to β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.84 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e presents the model with the standardized estimate. The Chi-square goodness of fit statistic was not statistically significant (χ\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;270.416, d.f\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;98, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.000). Since Chi-square is extremely sensitive to the model fit and tends to reject the model when the sample or model is large (Bentler and Bonett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1980\u003c/span\u003e). Due to the limitation of the Chi-square, other multiple indices were used to assess the model fit ie. CFI, GFI, TLI, and RMSEA, indicated that the model was supported by most of the indices. In the present model, the various indices were as follows: CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.973; GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.958; RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.048; TLI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.967; SRMR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.033. These results were found to be within the acceptable range, which shows that the four factors obtained from the EFA were validated.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabf\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"9\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable VI: Discriminant validity, CR, and AVE of the CFA model\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Fornel and Larker Criterion)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCR\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAVE\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMSV\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMaxR(H)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRB\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRA\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRC\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRD\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRB\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.839\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.566\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.366\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.844\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.752\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRA\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.911\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.630\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.379\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.913\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.605\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.794\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRC\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.812\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.591\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.379\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.818\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.588\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.616\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.768\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIRD\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.825\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.612\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.196\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.828\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.385\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.443\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.421\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.782\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, the convergent and the discriminant validity of the model was also established as shown in table VI. The AVE of the constructs was above the threshold value ie\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.50. The convergent validity of the model was established as CR\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.70, AVE\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.50, and CR\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;AVE (Brown and Moore, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Since the square root of AVE was found to be greater than the correlation coefficient of the other constructs. Hence discriminant validity of the model was established.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Discussion and conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eMost of the interpersonal relationship measurement scale has been developed focusing primarily on intimate and close personal relationships (Guerney, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1977\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, several scholars have used the modification of the scales to study the relationship of premarital or married couples (Gordon and Waldo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1984\u003c/span\u003e; Heitland, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e; Jessee and Guerney, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e). Also, the nurse-nurse collaboration scale developed by Dougherty and Larson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), measures organizational climate, focusing on communication, coordination, problem-solving, and conflict management and these categories have been adapted from the ICU nurse-physician questionnaire developed by Shortell et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e). Some of the studies also focus on the relationship between nurse and physician as a part of the organizational assessment method or as a subset of a larger construct (Sasagara, et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Vazirani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNurses are aware that they collaborate at work utilizing team management, emotion management, social management, and political management since the four elements established from the exploratory factor analysis have been validated. The management of the nurses' interpersonal relationships depends on each of the constructs to some extent. The sub-construct \"team management\" highlights the significance of working in a team, including supporting team members, building trust and a sense of community among co-workers, and collaborating with individuals from various cultural backgrounds. The ability of the nurses to regulate their emotions and deal with challenges and difficult circumstances sensibly is indicated by the sub-construct \"emotion management.\" The sub-construct \"politics management\" clarifies the capacity of nurses in managing work responsibility and using relationships for material benefits, while the sub-construct \"social management\" focuses on aspects such as handling personal commitment and maintaining cordial relationships with colleagues. The results show that the various sub-constructs are regarded as a crucial element that supports the interpersonal relationship scale developed during the study. Additionally, since it is a multidimensional scale, each dimension can be utilized separately as a scale (DeVellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. Managerial implication","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn the context of the nurse-nurse interaction in India, interpersonal relationships are a less discussed area in the healthcare sector (Bogaert and Kowalski, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Robson and Robson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Sarah, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). Studies are largely based on interactions between patients and nurses. It is sad for the future of academia and industry that there is so little quantitative research in this area. In addition, a severe lack of healthcare workers combined with a heavy workload leads to stress, emotional weariness, and burnout, all of which have a negative influence on patient care and safety (Pino and Rossini, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe goal of the current research study was to comprehend how crucial interpersonal relationships are at work for an organization's growth. The following are the study's implications:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince the study addresses the association and relevance of various factors of interpersonal relationships at the workplace. Hence, the healthcare sector will be benefitted by knowing the elements of interpersonal relationships at the workplace and the variables influencing them in detail and also aid organizations to design an appropriate training program for their employees.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearcher would like to give recommendations to the governing bodies to keep in place such practices that can boost the level of interpersonal relationships of the nursing staff which in turn will be more beneficial for organizational development and patient care.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of the research can also inform the researcher and the potential employer in terms of recruiting nurses with an acceptable level of required social skills and training them accordingly to prove patient-centric care.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA study by Kornhaber, et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) suggests that, primarily among younger and less experienced employees, exhaustion and burnout were found to have an indirect impact on nursing care. As a result, nursing managers have to change direction from educational intervention to a sense of social belonging. Clinical interpersonal relationships are the main element of all healthcare facilities that can be further enhanced by listening and responding to the person\u0026rsquo;s feelings. Relationship issues are also severely influenced by interpersonal problems such as employee emotional stress and inadequate communication (Howard and Shaw, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). By recognizing and communicating these concerns as well as obtaining the right leadership support, these interpersonal challenges can be further addressed.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"7. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study concludes with the validation of the 16-item scale to measure interpersonal relationships at the workplace. Moreover, the scale demonstrates acceptable reliability and validity. It can be said that work-related productivity is severely affected by people\u0026rsquo;s mental health. Most of the studies indicate that mental illness causes symptoms such as pain and stress and it lowers productivity at the workplace which has a direct impact on their family and social relationship (Vasconcelos et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Despite understanding that many aspects contribute to the nursing professional\u0026rsquo;s health risk, the administrators are neglecting the proactive measures and care for the same. The study has provided insight into the various dimensions of interpersonal relations in the context of health care professionals (nurses).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe four-factor scale can be used by nursing managers, and educators to understand the competencies of nurses towards people management, which have a significant impact on patient outcomes. Also, the scale would be helpful in assessing the effectiveness of the training program to measure the social skills and competencies of the nurses.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"8. Limitations and suggestions for future research","content":"\u003cp\u003eSince the study exclusively examined the nurse-nurse relationship, also the study's participating nurses were restricted to hospitals in the Delhi region of India. Hence, the place significance of the study imposes a restriction on its ability to be generalized. Additionally, the researcher can validate the scale using samples from other sectors. Also, the relationship of scale with the other psychological variable can also be explored as a future scope of study so as to find its significant impact on better workplace management.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e No financial grant was obtained for this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflicts of interest/Competing interests:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe author declares that there is no conflict of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe present research was a part of the doctoral research of the first author. Hence, prior ethical approval was granted by the doctoral committee,\u0026nbsp;Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi (India) to pursue this study from the institution where the researcher was registered.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to participate:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAbout the authors\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Sumit Kumar Debnath is working as an Asst. Professor at Ideal Institute of Management and Technology affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi. His keen research areas include organization behavior, and human resource management. Sumit Kumar Debnath is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProf. Puja Khatri is currently working as a Professor at the University School of Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi. She has a Ph.D. degree in organizational behavior and higher education. She has published more than 90 research papers and articles in journals of national and international repute and in proceedings of national and international conferences.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Shweta Nanda is currently working as Associate Professor, Amity University, Noida.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAfsar B, Cheema S and Masood M. (2017) \u0026lsquo;The role of emotional dissonance and emotional intelligence on job-stress, burnout and well-being among nurses.\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Information Systems and Change Management\u003c/em\u003e, Vol.9 (2). DOI: 10.1504/IJISCM.2017.087952 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaloch R S, Baloch A R and Shar A A. (2019) \u0026lsquo;Organisational obscurantism: synthesising prosocial lies with interpersonal relationship at workplace.\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion\u003c/em\u003e, Volume 10 (2). DOI: 10.1504/IJWOE.2019.104298\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBentler, P. M., and Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. \u003cem\u003ePsychological bulletin\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e88\u003c/em\u003e(3), 588.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBogaert, P. and Kowalski, C. (2013) \u0026lsquo;The relationship between nurse practice environment, nurse work characteristics, burnout and job outcome and quality of nursing care: A cross-sectional survey\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Nursing Studies\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 50, No. 12, pp.1667\u0026ndash;1677. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBorges JWP, Moreira TMM and Andrade DF. (2017) \u0026lsquo;Nursing Care Interpersonal Relationship Questionnaire: elaboration and validation.\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eRevista Latino\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e-Americana de Enfermagem\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 25:e2962. DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.2128.2962\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown, T. A. and Moore, M. T. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis. \u003cem\u003eHandbook of structural equation modeling\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e361\u003c/em\u003e, 379.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBurtson, P.L. and Stichler, J.F. (2010) \u0026lsquo;Nursing work environment and nurse caring: relationship among motivational factors\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Advanced Nursing\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 66(8), pp.1819\u0026ndash;1831. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChou, C. P. and Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeVellis, R.F. (1991) \u003cem\u003eScale development: Theory and Applications \u003c/em\u003e(Ed. P.1-113), Sage Publication, Newbury Park.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDonchin Y, Gopher D, Olin M et al.(1995) \u0026lsquo;A look into the nature and cause of human errors in the intensive care unit\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eCritical care medicine\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 23(2), pp.294-300.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDoran D, Sidani S, Keatings M and Doidge D. (2002) \u0026lsquo;An empirical test of the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Advance Nursing,\u003c/em\u003e Vol. 38(1), pp.29-39.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDougherty MB and Larson EL. (2010) \u0026lsquo;The nurse-nurse collaboration scale\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Nursing Administration\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 40(1), 17-25.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEspinoza et.al. (2018) \u0026lsquo;Interprofessional team member\u0026rsquo;s satisfaction: a mixed methods study of a Chilean hospital.\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eHuman Resources for Health\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 16(30).DOI: 10.1186/s12960-018-0290-z\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGarthoeffner J. L., Henry C. S., and Robinson L. C. (1993) \u0026lsquo;The modified interpersonal relationship scale: Reliability and Validity\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003ePsychological Reports\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 73, 995-1004.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGoldman, Z.W. and Goodboy, A. K. (2017) \u0026lsquo;Explaining doctoral student\u0026rsquo;s relational maintenance with their advisor: a psychosocial development perspective\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eCommunication Education\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 66(1), pp.70-89.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGordon S and Waldo M (1984) \u0026lsquo;The effects of assertiveness training on couple\u0026rsquo;s relationships\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eThe American Journal of Family Therapy\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 12, No. pp.73-77. DOI: 10.1080/01926188408250160\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuerney, B. G. (1977) \u003cem\u003eRelationship enhancement: skill training programs for therapy, problem prevention, and enrichment.\u003c/em\u003e San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHan, A., Won, J., Kim, O. and Lee, S.E. (2015) \u0026lsquo;Anger Expression Types and Interpersonal Problems in Nurses\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eAsian Nursing Research\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 146-151. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHeitland W (1986) \u0026lsquo;An experimental communication program for premarital dating couples\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eThe School Counselor\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp.57-61.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHooper, D., Coughlan, J.and Mullen, M. (2008, September). Evaluating model fit: a synthesis of the structural equation modelling literature. In \u003cem\u003e7th European Conference on research methodology for business and management studies\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 195-200).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHorowitz, L.M., Rosenberg, S.E., Baer, B.A. and Valerie, S. (1988) \u0026lsquo;Inventory of interpersonal problems: Psychometric properties and clinical applications\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 56(6), pp.885-892\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoward, J. and Shaw, E. (2011) \u0026lsquo;Up close and (inter)personal: Insights from a primary care practice\u0026rsquo;s efforts to improve office relationships over time, 2003\u0026ndash;2009\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eQuality Management in Health Care,\u003c/em\u003e Vol. 20(1), pp.49\u0026ndash;61.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. \u003cem\u003eStructural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1-55.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJessee, R. and Guerney, B.G. (1981) \u0026lsquo;A comparison of Gestalt and relationship enhancement treatments with married couples\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eThe American Journal of Family Therapy\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.31-41.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim, J. (2018) \u0026lsquo;Factors influencing nursing student\u0026rsquo;s empathy\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eKorean Journal of Medical Education\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 30(3), pp.229-236.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKornhaber, R., Walsh, K., Duff, J. and Walker, K. (2016) \u0026lsquo;Enhancing adult therapeutic interpersonal relationships in the acute health care setting: an integrative review\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 9, pp.537\u0026ndash;546. DOI: 10.2147/jmdh.s116957.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee CTS and Doran D.M. (2017) \u0026lsquo;The Role of Interpersonal Relations in Healthcare Team Communication and Patient Safety: A Proposed Model of Interpersonal Process in Teamwork.\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eCanadian Journal of Nursing Research\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 49(2).DOI: 10.1177/0844562117699349\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiew, J., Cao, Q., Hughes, J.N. and Deutz, M.H.F. (2018) \u0026lsquo;Academic Resilience Despite Early Academic Adversity: A Three-Wave Longitudinal Study on Regulation- Related Resiliency, Interpersonal Relationships, and Achievement in First to Third Grade\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eEarly Education and Development\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 29(5), pp.762-779.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMartinez-Zaragoza F. (2017) \u0026lsquo;Personality and interpersonal behaviour may impact on burnout in nurses.\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eEvidence Based Nursing\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 21(1). DOI: 10.1136/eb-2017-102797\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMonika R. (2019) \u0026lsquo;Factors influencing work engagement and its impact on task performance\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Business Excellence\u003c/em\u003e, Vol.17 (1), pp.97 \u0026ndash; 129.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMonux, Y.R., Juan, L.C., Marcos, A.P. and Sole, M.L. (2014) \u0026lsquo;Interpersonal relationships among hospital nurses and the use of communication skills\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eText Context Nursing,\u003c/em\u003e Vol. 23(3), pp.555-62. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNielsen, I.K., Jex, S.M. and Adams, G.A. (2000) \u0026lsquo;Development and Validation of Scores on a Two-Dimensional Workplace Friendship Scale\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eEducational and Psychological Measurement\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 60 (4), pp.628-643.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePenckofer, S., Byrn, M., Mumby, P., and Ferrans, C. (2011) \u0026lsquo;Improving Subject Recruitment, Retention, and Participation in Research through Peplau\u0026rsquo;s Theory of Interpersonal Relations\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eNursing Science Quarterly.\u003c/em\u003e Vol. 24(2), pp. 146\u0026ndash;151.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePerry, L., Xu, X., Gallagher, R., Nicholls, R., Sibbritt, D. and Duffield, C. (2018) \u0026lsquo;Lifestyle Health Behaviors of Nurses and Midwives: The \u0026lsquo;Fit for the Future\u0026rsquo; Study\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environment Research and Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 15, p. 945. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15050945\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePino,O. and Rossini,G. (2012) \u0026lsquo;Perceived Organizational Stressors and Interpersonal Relationships as Predictors of Job Satisfaction and Well-Being among Hospital Nurses\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 2(6), pp.196-207.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRajesh J.I. and Suganthi L. (2016) \u0026lsquo;The mediating role of interpersonal communication satisfaction between transformational leadership and follower\u0026rsquo;s trust.\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Business Excellence\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 9 (4). DOI: 10.1504/IJBEX.2016.076773\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRobson, A., and Robson, F. (2016) \u0026lsquo;Investigation of nurse\u0026rsquo;s intention to leave: a study of a sample of UK nurses\u0026rsquo;, Journal\u003cem\u003e of Health Organization and Management\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 30(1), pp. 154-173.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRubin, R.B., Perse, E.M. and Barbato, C.A. (1988) \u0026lsquo;Conceptualization and Measurement of Interpersonal Communication Motives\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eHuman Communication Research\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 14(4), pp. 602-628.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSarah, S. (2005) \u0026lsquo;Interpersonal relationships and the origins of mental health\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eJournal of Public Mental Health\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 4(1), pp. 24-29.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSasagara, T., Miyashita, M. and Kawa, K. (2003) \u0026lsquo;Difficulties encountered by nurses in the care of the terminal cancer patients in general hospitals in Japan\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003ePalliative Medicine,\u003c/em\u003e Vol. 17, pp. 520-526. DOI: 10.1191/0269216303pm802oa.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShortell S.M., Rousseau D, Gillies R, Devers K.J and Simons T.L. (1991) \u0026lsquo;Organisational assessment in intensive care units (ICUs): construct development, reliability, the validity of the ICU nurse-physician collaboration\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eMedical Care\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 29(8), pp. 709-23.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh A. and Rangnekar S. (2020) \u0026lsquo;Enhancing proactivity among hospital employees: a serial mediation model\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Business Excellence\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 21(1), pp. 64 \u0026ndash; 80.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStreiner (1994), \u0026lsquo;Figuring out factors: the use and misuse of factor analysis\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eCanadian Journal of Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 39(3), pp.135-140.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2014), \u003cem\u003eUsing Multivariate Statistics.\u003c/em\u003e 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e Ed. Harlow: Pearson.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMacCallum, R.C., Widaman, K.F., Zhang, S. and Hong, S. (1999), \u0026lsquo;Sample size in factor analysis\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003ePsychological Methods\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 4(1), pp. 84-99.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVazirani, S., Hays, R.D., Shapiro, M.F. and Cowan, M. (2005), \u0026lsquo;Effect of a multidisciplinary intervention on communication and collaboration among physicians and nurses\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Critical Care\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 14(1), pp. 71-77.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVasconcelos et al\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003e(2016),\u003cem\u003e \u0026lsquo;\u003c/em\u003eNursing Staff Members Mental\u0026rsquo;s Health and Factors Associated with the Work Process: An Integrative Review\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eClinical Practice \u0026amp; Epidemiology in Mental Health,\u003c/em\u003e Vol. 12, pp. 167-176. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVogli, R. (2010), \u0026lsquo;Social relationship at work and depression\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Epidemiology and Community Health\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 64(8), pp. 652-653.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWarshawsky, N., Havens, D. and Knafl, G. (2012), \u0026lsquo;The Influence of Interpersonal Relationships on Nurse Manager\u0026rsquo;s Work Engagement and Proactive Work Behavior\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Nursing Adm\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003einistration\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 42(9), pp. 418\u0026ndash;425.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWatanabe, N et al. (2015), \u0026lsquo;A mindfulness-based stress management program and treatment with omega-3 fatty acids to maintain a healthy mental state in hospital nurses (Happy Nurse Project): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eTrials\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 16(36)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0554-z\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang B, Kang, Y., Childerhouse, P., and Huo, B. (2018) \u0026lsquo;Service supply chain integration: the role of interpersonal relationships\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eIndustrial Management \u0026amp; Data Systems\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 118(4), pp. 828-849.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWells, C. S., \u0026amp; Wollack, J. A. (2003). An instructor\u0026rsquo;s guide to understanding test reliability. \u003cem\u003eTesting \u0026amp; Evaluation Services University of Wisconsin\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYeom E-Y. (2017) \u0026lsquo;The Influence of Interpersonal Problems, Emotional Labor on Professional Self-Concept among Clinical Nurses\u0026rsquo;, \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society\u003c/em\u003e, Vol. 18(6), pp.356-365.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYoo, J.H. and Choi, H.J. (2019) \u0026lsquo;A Study on the Relationship between Professional Self-concept, Interpersonal Relationship, Coping, Clinical Practice Satisfaction of Nursing College Students,Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society, Vol. 20(3), pp. 553-561.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":true,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Nurses, Interpersonal relationship, Exploratory factor analysis, Confirmatory factor analysis, AMOS","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3813602/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3813602/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"Interpersonal relationships are crucial for the growth and development of the organization as it directly or indirectly impacts employee performance. The present study aimed to develop an interpersonal relationship scale inventory for nurses, identifying the various dimensions of interpersonal relationships and validating the developed scale using EFA and CFA approaches. A methodological cross-sectional study design consisting of two phases was used. The study was conducted in government and private-sector hospitals. In the first phase, 250 nurses participated in the study, and 4 factors with 16 items were identified using EFA. In the second phase, confirmatory factor analysis was performed with a sample size of 766 nurses. Information related to factor loading (EFA), descriptive statistic, correlation matrix, standardized estimation in the CFA model, and discriminant validity were presented in tabular form. Data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 and AMOS 23.0. The result indicated that the CFA model was ascertained by the following indices: CFI =0.973; GFI= 0.958; RMSEA= 0.048; TLI= 0.967; SRMR= 0.033. The results were within the acceptable range, indicating that the four factors obtained from EFA were validated, also the reliability and the discriminant validity of the model were established. Moreover, the study shows that the four factors identified were regarded as crucial element that supports the interpersonal relationship scale developed in the study. The four-factor scale can be used by nursing managers, and educators to understand the competencies of nurses towards people management, which have a significant impact on patient outcomes. Also, the scale would be helpful in assessing the effectiveness of the training program to measure the social skills and competencies of the nurses, hence there exist a significant implication of this study. The study concludes with the validation of the four-factor interpersonal relationship scale inventory which can be a useful tool to assess workplace relationships for healthcare professionals. As a future scope, the researcher can validate the scale using different sample frames.","manuscriptTitle":"Validation of Interpersonal relationship scale inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis modelling approach using AMOS.","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-03-05 17:41:18","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3813602/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"a1f6054f-f884-4a01-b572-5fb42f234f59","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 5th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-09-21T11:04:24+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-03-05 17:41:18","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3813602","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3813602","identity":"rs-3813602","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}