User:Iah13/sandbox

Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS)
Page lacks citations entirely and has only two paragraphs of general information and brief history.

I want to add to the history, add to the context surrounding the topic, problems with the survey, variations of the survey (SJAS), and where the survey has been applied as well as the results that it has shown.

JAS-T
Form T of the Jenkins activity survey is a subform of the original Jenkins activity survey that utilizes the same methods and procedures as the Jenkins activity survey Form B, the adult version, but with questions altered to relate to student life as opposed to questions relating to occupational work (Bishop, 1989). This form was created in 1974 by Krantz, Glass, and Snyder to distinguish between Type A and Type B students and the differences among them relating to their school performance as well as gender differences and countless others. This form has been used in research not only to find information from students (Rainey, 1985) but also to test the reliability of Form T and subsequently the Jenkins Activity Survey as a whole (Bishop, 1989). Testing the reliability of this form is fundamental because although the changes made from the original survey were minor they could still have large effects in the overall scores and findings of the research. Research conducted by Bishop, Hailey, and O’Rourke in 1989 built off of previous research through using scores of those that were not found to be strongly Type A or Type B. In these cases, individuals who scored one standard deviation above the mean were classified as Type A and those one standard deviation below Type B. In this research, that utilized a test-retest approach, they were able to find reliable and statistically significant correlations between the first test and subsequent tests administered at the beginning of each of four semesters. These findings conclude the reliability of the test and add to other findings of the reliability of the overall Jenkins activity survey.

Citations:
Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Comparing five alternative factor-models of the Student Jenkins Activity Survey: Separating the wheat from the chaff. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64(1), 145–158. doi: org.ezproxy.fhsu.edu/10.1207/s15327752jpa6401_10

Research looking at Type A behavior in college undergraduates and the goodness of fit, factorial invariance, and factor reliabilities of the survey and the gaps of the measurement within the survey.

Bishop, E. G., & Hailey, B. J. (1989). Reliability of the Jenkins Activity Survey—Form T: Temporal stability and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53(1), 60–65. https://doi-org.ezproxy.fhsu.edu/10.1207/s15327752jpa5301_7

Test and retest of college students over time of speed/impatience and hard-driving/competitive attributes.

Hart, K. E. (1997). A moratorium on research using the Jenkins Activity Survey for Type A behavior? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 53(8), 905–907. doi: org.ezproxy.fhsu.edu/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199712)53:8<905::AID-JCLP15>3.0.CO;2-O

Review of literature indicating the JAS is not the best test of Type A behavior.

Bishop, E. G., & Hailey, B. J. (1989). Reliability of the Jenkins Activity Survey—Form T: Temporal stability and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53(1), 60–65. https://doi-org.ezproxy.fhsu.edu/10.1207/s15327752jpa5301_7

Test and retest of college students over time of speed/impatience and hard-driving/competitive attributes.

Jenkins, C. D., Zyzanski, S. J., & Rosenman, R. H. (1979). Jenkins activity survey. New York: Psychological Corporation.

This is the citation that was missing and incorrectly related to in the article.

Content:
Relevance and distractions: Information that is present is relevant and not bothered by distractions.

Information of date: Information is of date and relevant. While there are some older citations they are appropriate and helpful. All other citations are modern and statements are properly cited.

Other improvements: Explanation of theory is comprised simply of links to other articles and not actually explanatory. Research and examples are fully explanatory and are cited well.

Tone
Neutrality: The article does not take a particular side or come from a particular view point. It makes a point to state facts and not state opinions.

Over/underrepresentation: There are not necessarily viewpoints that are underrepresented or overrepresented. Overall viewpoint is very neutral and relies on findings of research and facts.

Talk Page
Talk occurred as a proposition to delete the page, which obviously was unsuccessful. This page has not been used for any WikiProjects.