Designing a Checklist for Corruption Measurement in China
Keywords:
Corruption, Measurement, Checklist, Validity, Reliability, ChinaAbstract
The present study has been conducted to construct a valid and reliable checklist of indicators for the construction of corruption measurement model in China. The study has used a DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) tool of six sigma technique for the checklist process improvement. Twenty-four experts with diversified background were included in the study to evaluate the applicability of the adapted version of corruption measurement tool in the Chinese context. The checklist comprised of five major departments under administrative sector; human resource management, financial management, asset management, external control, and services and authority departments. Kruskal Wallis test, Cronbach's alpha, R2, and internal consistency were applied to check the reliability and validity of the checklist. The results showed that all the indicators are applicable in the Chinese context and the designed checklist is highly reliable and valid for the construction of administrative corruption measurement model in China. This tool could be used in measuring the administrative level corruption in China and other researchers can test its applicability in different contexts for future use.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10317383
References
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological assessment, 7(3), 309.
Galtung, F. (2006). Measuring the immeasurable: boundaries and functions of (macro) corruption indices. Measuring corruption, 101.
Hales, B., Terblanche, M., Fowler, R., & Sibbald, W. (2007). Development of medical checklists for improved quality of patient care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 20(1), 22-30.
Hassanein, S., El-Sayed, Z., & Raouf, H. A. (2013). Validity and Reliability of Checklists Used for Objective Structured Clinical Examination: Piloting Modified Tools.
Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (1997). The Activity Theory Checklist: A Tool for Representing the" Space" of Context. Unpublished communications with the authors and tutorial at CHI, 97.
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2007). Measuring corruption: myths and realities.
Kruskal, W. H., & Wallis, W. A. (1952). Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47(260), 583-621.
Lambsdorff, J. G. (2006). Measuring corruption–the validity and precision of subjective indicators (CPI). Measuring corruption, 81, 81.
Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., & Michels, L. C. (2006). The sources of four commonly reported cutoff criteria: What did they really say? Organizational research methods, 9(2), 202-220.
Lanyi, A., & Azfar, O. (2005). Tools for Assessing Corruption and Integrity in Institutions: A Handbook. United States Agency for International Development, United States Government.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric methods (pp. 245): New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pennington, D. C. (2003). Essential personality: Oxford University Press.
Pyzdek, T. (2003). Six Sigma Handbook. New York: The McGraw-HIll Companies, Inc.
Scriven, M. (2000). The logic and methodology of checklists. Интернет–ресурс http://www. which. edu/evaluate/checklists/papers/logic&methodology_dec07. pdf.
Shan, M., Chan, A. P., Le, Y., Xia, B., & Hu, Y. (2015). Measuring corruption in public construction projects in China. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 141(4), 05015001.
Tabish S.Z.S, J. K. N. (2011). Analyses and evaluation of irregularities in public procurement in India. Construction Management and Economics, 29(3), 261-274.
Winters, B. D., Gurses, A. P., Lehmann, H., Sexton, J. B., Rampersad, C. J., & Pronovost, P. J. (2009). Clinical review: checklists-translating evidence into practice. Critical Care, 13(6), 210.
Yun, J.-S. (2004). Model for measuring Korean administrative corruption: focusing on the application of the AHP method. International Area Review, 7(1), 221-245.
