116 Chapter 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Descriptive Statistics Means, standard deviations, and correlations between the variables in Study 1 can be found in Table 1. TABLE 1 Descriptive Statistics and Within-Person Correlations, Study 1 Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. PVM 4.83 1.49 - 2. Mindfulness 5.27 1.44 .54** - 3. Fluency of ideas 5.30 2.85 -.04 -.13** - 4. Originality of ideas 4.27 1.53 .22** .16** .45** - 5. Work engagement (control) 4.10 1.53 .59** .47** -.11* .11* - Note. N = 133 persons and n = 521 observations. PVM = proactive vitality management. *p < .05, **p < .01 Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analyses Prior to testing our hypotheses, we conducted a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) using Mplus software (Muthén & Muthén, 1998 - 2012). The aim of the MCFA was to examine the measurement model and check for construct validity and independence of our variables, as well as to test thoroughly whether we could empirically distinguish the predictor in our model (proactive vitality management) from the mediator (mindfulness). We modeled both the within- and between-person covariance matrices simultaneously and included latent factors for proactive vitality management (eight items) and mindfulness (five items). The outcome variables originality and fluency are both represented by singular indicators (i.e., scores) and were thus included in the model as observed variables. This multilevel model, in which all items of the variables in our model loaded on their respective latent factors, fit the data well (CFI = .96, TLI = .96, RMSEA = .04, SRMR within = .05, SRMR between = .06). In addition, all factor loadings were significant (p < .001). Finally, this model fit the data significantly better than an alternative model in which the items of proactive vitality management and mindfulness
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw