To test commitment, Mowday et al. (1979) developed and validated the Organisational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ). Three items from this questionnaire state: • I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that normally expected in order to help this organisation be successful. • I am proud to tell others that I am part of this organisation. • I feel very little loyalty to this organisation. Each is scored on a 7-point scale: 1 = strongly agree, 7 = strongly disagree.

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (May/June 2019). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. [2] Most likely answer Quote from study: Organisational commitment was defined here as the relative strength of an individual's identification with and involvement in a particular organization. It can be characterised by at least three related factors: (1) a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization's goals and values; (2) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization; and (3) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization.
2. [2] Marks: 1 mark for basic answer (bold above). 1 mark for elaboration/example (e.g. point from above).
3. [4] Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): Advantages: a seven point scale allows a wide range of responses from 'not at all justifiable' to 'totally justifiable'
4. [4] a seven point scale includes a mid-point, which is neutral, so any participant who really feels neutral can choose this option.
5. [4] a seven point scale will provide quantitative data that can be statistically analysed.
6. [4] Marks: 1 mark basic answer, 2 marks detailed answer/elaboration for each. Note: answers must be related to the OCQ. If not 1 mark max for each advantage.
7. [4] Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): Quote from study: 1 Sample size; 2563 employees working in a wide variety of jobs in nine different work organisations. In all, the array of both job classifications and work organizations is thought to be sufficiently broad to tap a reasonably representative sample of the working population
8. [4] 2 Wide range of occupations: Jobs include: publics employees, classified university employees, hospital employees, bank employees, telephone company employees, scientists and engineers, auto company managers, psychiatric technicians, retail management trainees.
9. [4] Marks: 1 mark basic answer, 2 marks detailed answer/elaboration ×2.
10. [5] Marks: Question requires discussion; always plural of each argument, and always requires conclusion.
11. [5] 1 mark for each advantage/disadvantage (however detailed) and related to the question up to 4 max. 2 marks max for two strengths/weaknesses unrelated to the question. 1 mark for conclusion.
12. [5] Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): Advantages: questionnaires can include a wide range of pertinent items that may not be included in a self report of an accident.
13. [5] questionnaires can provide quantitative data which may allow comparisons to be made with other accidents of the same type.
14. [5] questionnaires can provide qualitative data through open ended questions allowing a worker to report in detail what happened.
15. [5] Disadvantages: the questionnaire might be pre-written with items that do not apply or do not cover the specifics of a particular accident.
16. [5] workers may not answer the questions truthfully if their job is at stake.
17. [5] questionnaires may only give quantitative data; an open ended-question may be more revealing
18. [5] questionnaires might include leading words.
19. [5] Conclusion: any appropriate conclusion drawn from the discussion that has been presented. 1 mark if appropriate. A conclusion is a 'decision reached by reasoning' and so a summary of points already made scores 0 marks.