Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In this study a confirmatory methodology was implemented to analyze a model that uses the Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman (1970) scales of role conflict (RC) and role ambiguity (RA; i.e., the Bedeian and Armenakis, 1981, model). The validity of the RC and RA scales were examined through structural equations analysis, and a nested models approach was used to compare the Bedeian and Armenakis model with a model suggesting a more parsimonious representation of the data. Furthermore, path estimates from models incorporating random measurement error were compared with estimates from a model not incorporating the effects of random measurement error
Netemeyer et al. (Sun,) studied this question.