Refonte de la version québécoise de l’Échelle Entrepreneure de l'inventaire typologique de caractéristiques personnelles (EE-ITCP-72-R)
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.53379/cjcd.2025.429Mots-clés :
EE-ITCP-72-R, Orientation professionnelle, personnalité, théorie vocationnelle, RIASEC, EntrepreneureRésumé
Afin de faciliter l’évaluation de l’orientation professionnelle, John L. Holland a développé la théorie vocationnelle selon un modèle hexagonal postulant que la personnalité professionnelle et les environnements de travail se subdivisent selon six types distincts dans les sociétés occidentales. En plus de ses intérêts, la personnalité de l'individu, c'est-à-dire ses caractéristiques personnelles, contribue à une meilleure compréhension du choix vocationnel. L’objectif principal de cette étude porte sur la refonte la version québécoise de l’Échelle Entrepreneure de l'Inventaire Typologique de Caractéristiques Personnelles (EE-ITCP-72-R). Pour cette étude, 308 participants franco-québécois ont été recrutés. L'EE-ITCP-72-R comprend 12 caractéristiques personnelles. L’analyse factorielle exploratoire supporte également que l’Échelle Entrepreneure du modèle RIASEC de Holland n’est pas unidimensionnelle et qu'elle peut être sous-divisée en trois dimensions. Les indices de consistance interne de chaque dimension sont également adéquats. Pour conclure, étant basé sur la théorie vocationnelle de Holland, l'EE-ITCP-72-R permet de déterminer le profil vocationnel en lien avec la personnalité professionnelle de type Entrepreneure. De plus, la présence de dimensions permet de peaufiner le profil afin d’illustrer l'individualité du répondant avec davantage de précisions et de s'assurer de la plus grande adéquation avec le domaine d'emploi recherché.
Références
Alarie-Mercier, R., Pelletier, A., & Balbinotti, M. A. A. (2025). Révision de la version québécoise de l’inventaire typologique de caractéristiques personnelles (ITCP-90) et exploration des dimensionalités [Manuscrit non publié]. Département de psychologie, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières.].
Balbinotti, M. A. A. (2002). Inventario Tipologico de Caracteristicas Pessoais. Laboratoire de psychologie du sport. Université Fédérale du Rio Grande du Sud : Porto Alegre.
Balbinotti, M. A. A. (2004). Inventario Tipologico de Caracteristicas Pessoais. 2e version. Université Fédérale du Rio Grande du Sud: Porto Alegre.
Balbinotti, M. A. A. (2005). Para se avaliar o que se espera: reflexões acerca da validade dos testes psicológicos. Aletheia, 21(1), 43-52. https://pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/aletheia/n21/n21a05.pdf
Bartlett, M. S. (1937). Properties of Sufficiency and Statistical Test. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 160, 268-282. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1937.0109
Bartlett, M. S. (1951). The effect of standardization on a Chi-square approximation in factor analysis. Biometrika, 38(3/4), 337-344. https://doi.org/10.2307/2332580
Béland, S., Cousineau, D. & Loye, N. (2017). Utiliser le coefficient omega de McDonald à la place de l’alpha de Cronbach. McGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l’éducation de McGill, 52(3), 791–804. https://doi.org/10.7202/1050915ar
Bentler, P. M. (1977). Factor simplicity index and transformations. Psychometrika, 42, 277-295. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294054
Bentler, P. (1995). EQS program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
Bernaud, J.-L., & Priou, P. (1994). Inventaire d’intérêts professionnels I.R.M.R. Manuel d’utilisation et manuel d’interprétation. Issy-les-Moulineaux : E.A.P.
Buja, A., & Eyuboglu, N. (1992). Remarks on parallel analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27(4), 509-540. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2704_2
Briddick, W. C. (2009). Frank Parsons on interests. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 230-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.12.003
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research (2e éd.). New York, NY: Guilford Publications. https://www.guilford.com/books/Confirmatory-Factor-Analysis-for-Applied-Research/Timothy-Brown/9781462515363?srsltid=AfmBOooO4LCl2kPla-U-5ZhraFq8dzPgbMCuPycHSQOCDcHQenzFTEMr
Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Dans L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold, Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 99-136). American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4316510
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2e éd.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203805534
Case, J. C., & Blackwell, T. L. (2008). Test Review: Strong, EK, Jr., Donnay, DAC, Morris, ML, Schaubhut, NA, & Thompson, RC (2004). Strong Interest Inventory®, Revised Edition. Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. (Newly Revised Strong Profile Preview Kit — 14.65; Newly Revised Strong Profile Administration, online — 7.80; Newly Revised Strong Profile Combined Item Booklet/Answer Sheets, mail-in —78.00pkg/10; Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory Manual — 69.00; Strong Interest Inventory User’s Guide —29.50; Where Do I Go Next? — 55.00 pkg .... Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 51(2), 122-126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034355207311350
Cho, E. (2021). Neither Cronbach’s Alpha nor McDonald’s Omega: A Commentary on Sijtsma and Pfadt. Psychometrika, 86, 877-886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-021-09801-1
Choi, J., Kim, S., Chen, J., & Dannels, S. (2011). A comparison of maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation for polychoric correlation using Monte Carlo simulation. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 36(4), 523–549. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998610381398
Clark, L. & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309-319. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309
Corbière, M., & Larivière, N. (2014). Méthodes qualitatives, quantitatives et mixtes. Dans la recherche en sciences humaines, sociales et de la santé. Québec : Presses de l’Université du Québec. https://www.puq.ca/catalogue/livres/methodes-qualitatives-quantitatives-mixtes-edition-3773.html
Cronbach, J. L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test Validation. In R. Thorndike (éd.), Educational Measurement (2e éd., p. 443). Washington DC: American Council on Education.
Cronbach, L. J., & Shavelson, R. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(3), 391-418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164404266386
Cureton, E.E., & D’Agostino, R.B. (2013). Factor Analysis: An Applied Approach (1er éd.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315799476
Deng, L., & Chan, W. (2017). Testing the difference between reliability coefficients alpha and omega. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 77(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164416658325
DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
DeVellis, R.F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Vol. 26, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Introducing LISREL. London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209359
DiStefano, C., Liu, J., Jiang, N., & Shi, D. (2018). Examination of the Weighted Root Mean Square Residual: Evidence for Trustworthiness? Structural Equation Modeling, 25(3), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1390394
Donnay, D. A. C. (1997). E. K. Strong’s legacy and beyond: 70 years of the Strong Interest Inventory. The Career Development Quarterly, 46(1), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.1997.tb00688.x
Donnay, D. A. C., & Borgen, F. H. (1996). Validity, structure, and content of the 1994 Strong Interest Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43(3), 275–291. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.43.3.275
Donnay, D. A. C., Morris, M. L., Schaubhut, N. A., & Thompson, R. C. (2005). Strong Interest Inventory Manual. Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.
Donnay, D. A., Thompson, R. C., Morris, M. L., & Schaubhut, N. A. (2004). Technical brief for the newly revised Strong interest assessment: Content, reliability and validity. Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press Incorporated.
Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2016). A note on improving EAP trait estimation in oblique factor-analytic and item response theory models. Psicológica, 37(2), 235-247. https://www.uv.es/revispsi/articulos2.16/7Ferrando.pdf
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva U. (2018). Assessing the quality and appropriateness of factor solutions and factor score estimates in exploratory item factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 78, 762-780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164417719308
Field, A.P. (2018). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics (5e éd.), Sage, Newbury Park. https://collegepublishing.sagepub.com/products/discovering-statistics-using-ibm-spss-statistics-5-260423
Furr, R. M. (2021). Psychometrics: an introduction. SAGE publications. https://collegepublishing.sagepub.com/products/psychometrics-4-270928
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Grutter, J., and Hammer, A. L. (2005). Strong Interest Inventory user’s guide: Practitioner’s tool for understanding, interpreting and use of the Strong profile and interpretive report. Mountainview, CA: Consulting Psychology Press. https://ap.themyersbriggs.com/Strong-Interest-Inventory-10/Strong-Interest-Inventory-Users-Guide-1-155
Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s Reference Guide (2e éd.), Scientific Software International, Chicago.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/a-primer-on-partial-least-squares-structural-equation-modeling-pls-sem/book270548
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N.P., Ray, S. (2021). Evaluation of Reflective Measurement Models. Dans : Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R. Classroom Companion: Business. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7_4
Haji-Othman, Y., & Yusuff, M. S. S. (2022). Assessing Reliability and Validity of Attitude Construct Using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(5), 378-385. http://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v12-i5/13289
Hancock, G. R. (2001). Effect size, power, and sample size determination for structured means modeling and MIMIC approaches to between-groups hypothesis testing of means on a single latent construct. Psychometrika, 66, 373-388. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294440
Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (2000). Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems. Dans R. Cudek, S. H. C. duToit & D. F. Sorbom (éd.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future (pp. 195-216). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software.
Hannon, L. W., Hansen, J. C., Borgen, F. H., & Hammer, A. L. (1994). Strong Interest Inventory: Applications and technical guide. Palo Alto.
Harmon, L. W., DeWitt, D. W., Campbell, D. P., & Hansen, J. I. C. (1994). Strong interest inventory: Applications and technical guide: form T317 of the Strong vocational interest blanks. Stanford University Press.
Hayton, J. C., Allen, D. G., & Scarpello, V. (2004). Factor Retention Decisions in Exploratory Factor Analysis: a Tutorial on Parallel Analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 7(2), 191-205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428104263675
Hogan, J., & Holland, B. (2003). Using theory to evaluate personality and job-relations: a socioanalytic perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 100-112. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.100
Hogan, R., & Blake, R. (1999). John Holland’s vocational typology and personality theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55(1), 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1696
Holland, J. L. (1959). A Theory of Vocational Choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 6(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040767
Holland, J. L. (1973). Making Vocational Choices : A theory of careers (Prentice-Halls Ed.). New Jersey.
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making Vocational Choices A theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments (3e éd.). Psychological Assessment Ressources. Florida.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575
Kaiser, H. F., & Rice, J. (1974). Little jiffy, mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(l), 111-117. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400115
Kelley, T. L. (1935). Essential Traits of Mental Life (Harvard Studies in Education., Vol 26). Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4e éd.). New York: The Guilford Press.
Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5e éd.). Guilford Press.
Kuder, G. F. (1938a). The preference record. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Bookstore.
Laberon, S., & Trahan, M. (2005). Quelques repères méthodologiques pour l’élaboration d’inventaires d’intérêts professionnels: La psychologie des intérêts. Carriérologie (Montréal), 10(1-2), 119-130. https://www.carrierologie.uqam.ca/index.php/2005/quelques-reperes-methodologiques-pour-lelaboration-dinventaires-dinterets-professionnels/
Larcebeau, S. (1971). Deux inventaires d’intérêts destinés aux élèves du second cycle de l’enseignement secondaire: QIA/m et f et QIP/m et f. L’Orientation scolaire et professionnelle, 27(5), 303-325. https://www.persee.fr/doc/binop_0005-3147_1971_num_27_5_1894
Larson, L. M., Rottinghaus, P. J., & Borgen, F. H. (2002). Meta-analysis of Big Six Interests and Big Five Personality Factors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 217-239. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1854
Likert, R. (1931). A technique for the measurement of attitudes: Archives of Psychology. New-York: Columbia University Press.
Lorenzo-Seva, U. (1999). Promin: a method for oblique factor rotation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34(3), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr34033
Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2003). A factor simplicity index. Psychometrika, 68, 49-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296652
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2006). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 38(1), 88-91. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192753
Lorenzo-Seva, u., & Ferrando, P. J. (2013). FACTOR 9.2 A Comprehensive Program for Fitting Exploratory and Semi-confirmatory Factor Analysis and IRT Models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(6), 497-498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621613487794
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2019). Robust Promin: A method for diagonally weighted factor rotation. Liberabit: Revista Peruana de Psicología, 25(1), 99–106. https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2019.v25n1.08
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2020). Unrestricted factor analysis of multidimensional test items based on an objectively refined target matrix. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 116-130. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01209-1
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2021). MSA: The forgotten index for identifying inappropriate items before computing exploratory item factor analysis. Methodology, 17(4), 296-306. https://doi.org/10.5964/meth.7185
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychological theory. New York, NY: MacGraw-Hill.
Maguire, T. O., & Rogers, W. T. (1989). Proposed Solutions for Nonrandomness in Educational Research. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue Canadienne de l’éducation, 14(2), 170-181. https://doi.org/10.2307/1495349
McDonald, R. P. (1970). The theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis, canonical factor analysis, and alpha factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 23, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1970.tb00432.x
McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38(2), 171-189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x
Muthén, L. K. and Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus User’s Guide (8e ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Padilla, M. A., & Divers, J. (2016). A Comparison of Composite Reliability Estimators: Coefficient Omega Confidence Intervals in the Current Literature. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76(3), 436-453. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164415593776
Pavlov, G., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Shi, D. (2021). Using the Standardized Root Mean Squared Residual (SRMR) to Assess Exact Fit in Structural Equation Models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 81(1), 110–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164420926231
Pelletier, A. (2018). Exploration des dimensionnalités de l’inventaire typologique de caractéristiques personnelles: une étude avec un échantillon d’étudiants universitaires franco-québécois. [Essai de doctorat inédit, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières]. https://depot-e.uqtr.ca/id/eprint/8747
Poitras, S. C., Guay, F., & Ratelle, C. F. (2012). Using the self-directed search in research: Selecting a representative pool of items to measure vocational interests. Journal of Career Development, 39(2), 186-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845310384593
Pohlmann, J. T. (2004). Use and interpretation of factor analysis Dans The Journal of Educational Research : 1992-2002. Journal of Educational Research, 98(1), 14-22. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.1.14-23
Psychometrics Canada. (2012). Manuel de l’Inventaire des intérêts professionnels StrongMD. https://www.psychometrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/strong-occ-fr.pdf
Revelle, W., & Zinbarg, R. E. (2009). Coefficients alpha, beta, omega, and the glb: Comments on Sigma. Psychometrika, 74(1), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9102-z
Rochette S., & Balbinotti M. A. A. (2016). Guidelines for using exploratory factor analysis to test construct validity of inventories in sports research. AJST, 1(3), 57-71. https://www.aujst.com
Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016). Applying bifactor statistical indices in the evaluation of psychological measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(3), 223-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1089249
Rothwell, J. E., & Miller, K. M. (2011). IRMR 3 : inventaire d’intérêts professionnels de Rothwell-Miller. ECPA Pearson.
Savickas, M. L., & Savickas, S. (2017). Vocational psychology, overview. In Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology, Reference Module, (pp. 460–470). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.05746-1
Strong, E. K., Jr. (1958). Satisfactions and interests. American Psychologist, 13(8), 449-456. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047824
Su, R., Murdock, C., & Rounds, J. (2015). Person-Environment Fit. Dans A P. Association (éd.), APA Handbook of Career Intervention: Vol. 1 Foundations (pp. 448). Washington, D.C. https://doi.org/10.1037/14438-000
Sullivan, B. A, & Hansen, J.-1. C. (2004). Mapping Associations Between Interests and Personality: Toward a Conceptual Understanding of 1ndividual Differences III Vocational Behavior. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(3), 287-298. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.51.3.287
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5e éd.). Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Using Multivariate Statistics. (6e éd.). Pers on Education: Boston.
Ten Berge, J.M.F., Snijders, T.A.B. & Zegers, F.E. (1981). Computational aspects of the greatest lower bound to reliability and constrained minimum trace factor analysis. Psychometrika, 46, 201-213. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02293900
Ten Berge, M. F., & Socan, G. (2004). The greatest lower bound to the reliability of a test and the hypothesis of unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 69, 613-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289858
Tétreau, B. (2005). L’essor d’une psychologie des intérêts professionnels. Carriérologie, 1(1), 75-118. https://www.carrierologie.uqam.ca/index.php/2005/lessor-dune-psychologie-des-interets-professionnels/
Timmerman, M. E., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2011). Dimensionality Assessment of Ordered Polytomous Items with Parallel Analysis. Psychological Methods, 16, 209-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023353
Tracey, T. J. G., Wille, B., Duit, M. R., & De Fruyt, F. (2014). An enhanced examination of Holland’s consistency and differentiation hypotheses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84(3), 237-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.01.008
Trizano-Hermosilla, I., & Alvarado, J. M. (2016). Best alternatives to Cronbach’s alpha reliability in realistic conditions: congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in Psychology, 7,. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 28, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170
Vrignaud, P., & Bernaud, J. L. (2005). L’évaluation des intérêts professionnels. Mardaga. https://www.editionsmardaga.com/products/evaluation-des-interets-professionnels
Woodhouse, B., & Jackson, P. H. (1977). Lower bounds to the reliability of the total score on a test composed of nonhomogeneous items: II. A search procedure to locate the greatest lower bound. Psychometrika, 42, 579-591. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295980
Yu, C., & Muthen, B. (2002). Evaluation of model fit indices for latent variable models with categorical and continuous outcomes [Paper presentation]. American Educational Research Association Annual meeting, New Orleans, L.A, United States.
Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Factors influencing five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3), 432-442. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.99.3.432
Fichiers supplémentaires
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
© Robert Alarie-Mercier, Marcos Balbinotti 2025
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
Les droits d'auteur de cet article appartiennent à l'auteur conformément aux conditions de la licence Creative Commons Attribution - Utilisation non commerciale - Pas d’Œuvre dérivée 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). En vertu de cette licence :
1. Les auteurs conservent leurs droits d'auteur et accordent à la Revue canadienne du développement de carrière le droit de première publication, l'œuvre étant simultanément placée sous une licence Creative Commons Attribution qui autorise les autres à la partager à condition de mentionner son auteur et sa publication initiale dans cette revue
2. Les auteurs peuvent conclure des accords contractuels distincts et supplémentaires pour la diffusion non exclusive de la version publiée de l'œuvre par la revue (par exemple, la publier dans un dépôt institutionnel, dans une revue ou dans un livre), en mentionnant sa publication initiale dans cette revue.
3. Les auteurs sont autorisés et encouragés à publier leur travail en ligne (par exemple, dans des dépôts institutionnels ou sur leur site web) avant et pendant le processus de soumission, car cela peut donner lieu à des échanges fructueux, ainsi qu'à une citation plus rapide et plus importante de l'œuvre publiée.
Le CERIC finance des projets visant à développer des programmes, des ressources, des publications et des événements innovants en orientation et en développement de carrière
