Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: Applying equity theory to staff in learning disability services
Author: Disley, Philip Alan John
Awarding Body: Lancaster University
Current Institution: Lancaster University
Date of Award: 2010
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
According to Adams' (1965) equity theory. individuals determine how fairly they are being treated in relationships by comparing their ratio of inputs and rewards with those of a comparison other. A small number of studies on staff working in services for people with learning disabilities (LD) have utilised this theory, A review of these studies found a number of theoretical and methodological issues that require investigation. The aim of the current study was to address these issues. Specifically, its main aims were to (I) find out what inputs and rewards are relevant to LD service staff and who they compare themselves to (2) develop and evaluate a detailed measure of staff equity perceptions that is suitable for LD service staff - The Equity Perception Scale - Learning Disability Service (EPS-LDS) - and (3) expand on previous research by investigating whether staff equity perceptions are associated with a number of variables that have not previously been investigated within the context of LD services (i.e. performance, job satisfaction and organisational commitment). Data was collected using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods (i.e. semi-structured interviews (n=; 15), focus groups (n = 7) and postal questionnaires (n = 143)) and data analysis procedures (e.g. template analysis and non-parametric statistical tests). A wide range of inputs, outcomes and comparison others were identified. Overall, the EPS-LDS was found to possess acceptable internal consistency reliability, construct validity and criterion validity. The overall test-retest reliability of the measure, however, was found to be unsatisfactory. Staff equity perceptions were found to be associated with performance. job satisfaction and organisational commitment. Possible explanations for some of the findings are forwarded. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for research and practice. Directions for future research are proposed.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available