The Climate for Diversity Index measures three dimensions associated with the ability of organizations or units to create an environment that allows members of all sociocultural backgrounds to participate and fully develop. The climate for diversity impacts individual outcomes such as general job satisfaction, affective commitment, identification with a psychological group/department, organizational citizenship behavior, and the intent to turnover. Several structural models depicting the relationship between the climate for diversity and the individual outcome variables were examined. Significant differences in perceptions of the climate for diversity are predicted by ethnicity, disability, and position. Data were provided by 319 members of a wide variety of organizations including hospitals, banks, and athletic clubs. Tests of reliability and validity indicate that the Climate for Diversity Index is a dependable instrument for the assessment of the climate for diversity. The scale reflects intentionally designed \"openness to diversity\" differences in the environment. The scale is internally consistent and distinct from social desirability and the desirability of diversity. Participants were probed at the group level. However, evidence supporting aggregation is contradictory; the analysis of variance and the test of interrater reliability suggest that aggregation is appropriate, but the conservative within- and between-analysis rejects the group level. The a priori and alternate structural models were examined with both disaggregated and aggregated data. The model of best fit was the a priori model using disaggregated data. Thus, the construct may be best considered at the individual level of analysis. Implications of an \"independent\" climate for diversity construct are fully discussed.
","abstract_html":"<p>The Climate for Diversity Index measures three dimensions associated with the ability of organizations or units to create an environment that allows members of all sociocultural backgrounds to participate and fully develop. The climate for diversity impacts individual outcomes such as general job satisfaction, affective commitment, identification with a psychological group/department, organizational citizenship behavior, and the intent to turnover. Several structural models depicting the relationship between the climate for diversity and the individual outcome variables were examined. Significant differences in perceptions of the climate for diversity are predicted by ethnicity, disability, and position. Data were provided by 319 members of a wide variety of organizations including hospitals, banks, and athletic clubs. Tests of reliability and validity indicate that the Climate for Diversity Index is a dependable instrument for the assessment of the climate for diversity. The scale reflects intentionally designed "openness to diversity" differences in the environment. The scale is internally consistent and distinct from social desirability and the desirability of diversity. Participants were probed at the group level. However, evidence supporting aggregation is contradictory; the analysis of variance and the test of interrater reliability suggest that aggregation is appropriate, but the conservative within- and between-analysis rejects the group level. The a priori and alternate structural models were examined with both disaggregated and aggregated data. The model of best fit was the a priori model using disaggregated data. Thus, the construct may be best considered at the individual level of analysis. Implications of an "independent" climate for diversity construct are fully discussed.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Vick, Amy L."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Donald D. Davis","Glynn D. Coates","Melinda J. Montgomery","Janis Sanchez-Hucles"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1996,"date_issued":"1996-10-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"1996-10-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:34:31Z","subjects":["Diversity","Climate for diversity index","Industrial and Organizational Psychology","Labor Relations"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).
"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["9780591442625"],"render_values":[{"text":"9780591442625","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/psychology_etds/180","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Donald D. Davis","Glynn D. Coates","Melinda J. Montgomery","Janis Sanchez-Hucles"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Vick, Amy L."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2019-04-05T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Diversity","Climate for diversity index","Industrial and Organizational Psychology","Labor Relations"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).
"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["9780591442625","https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/psychology_etds/180"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The Climate for Diversity Index measures three dimensions associated with the ability of organizations or units to create an environment that allows members of all sociocultural backgrounds to participate and fully develop. The climate for diversity impacts individual outcomes such as general job satisfaction, affective commitment, identification with a psychological group/department, organizational citizenship behavior, and the intent to turnover. Several structural models depicting the relationship between the climate for diversity and the individual outcome variables were examined. Significant differences in perceptions of the climate for diversity are predicted by ethnicity, disability, and position. Data were provided by 319 members of a wide variety of organizations including hospitals, banks, and athletic clubs. Tests of reliability and validity indicate that the Climate for Diversity Index is a dependable instrument for the assessment of the climate for diversity. The scale reflects intentionally designed \"openness to diversity\" differences in the environment. The scale is internally consistent and distinct from social desirability and the desirability of diversity. Participants were probed at the group level. However, evidence supporting aggregation is contradictory; the analysis of variance and the test of interrater reliability suggest that aggregation is appropriate, but the conservative within- and between-analysis rejects the group level. The a priori and alternate structural models were examined with both disaggregated and aggregated data. The model of best fit was the a priori model using disaggregated data. Thus, the construct may be best considered at the individual level of analysis. Implications of an \"independent\" climate for diversity construct are fully discussed.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Measuring Organizational Climate for Diversity"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Donald D. Davis","Glynn D. Coates","Melinda J. Montgomery","Janis Sanchez-Hucles"],"dc:creator":["Vick, Amy L."],"dc:date.available":["2019-04-05T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The Climate for Diversity Index measures three dimensions associated with the ability of organizations or units to create an environment that allows members of all sociocultural backgrounds to participate and fully develop. The climate for diversity impacts individual outcomes such as general job satisfaction, affective commitment, identification with a psychological group/department, organizational citizenship behavior, and the intent to turnover. Several structural models depicting the relationship between the climate for diversity and the individual outcome variables were examined. Significant differences in perceptions of the climate for diversity are predicted by ethnicity, disability, and position. Data were provided by 319 members of a wide variety of organizations including hospitals, banks, and athletic clubs. Tests of reliability and validity indicate that the Climate for Diversity Index is a dependable instrument for the assessment of the climate for diversity. The scale reflects intentionally designed \"openness to diversity\" differences in the environment. The scale is internally consistent and distinct from social desirability and the desirability of diversity. Participants were probed at the group level. However, evidence supporting aggregation is contradictory; the analysis of variance and the test of interrater reliability suggest that aggregation is appropriate, but the conservative within- and between-analysis rejects the group level. The a priori and alternate structural models were examined with both disaggregated and aggregated data. The model of best fit was the a priori model using disaggregated data. Thus, the construct may be best considered at the individual level of analysis. Implications of an \"independent\" climate for diversity construct are fully discussed.
"],"dc:identifier":["9780591442625","https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/psychology_etds/180"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).
"],"dc:subject":["Diversity","Climate for diversity index","Industrial and Organizational Psychology","Labor Relations"],"dc:title":["Measuring Organizational Climate for Diversity"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:34:31Z"}