Table 1 Reliability and validity...

Table 1

Reliability and validity

Constructs	α	CR	AVE	rho_A
Workplace FoMO	0.85	0.90	0.63	0.86
OS	0.87	0.91	0.71	0.87
WSMU	0.86	0.90	0.60	0.87
RP	0.81	0.89	0.72	0.81
IP	0.85	0.91	0.76	0.85

	1	2	3	4	5	6
Fornell-Larcker criterion
Workplace FoMO (1)	0.80
IP (2)	0.26*	0.87
OS (3)	0.38**	0.41***	0.84
RP (4)	0.33**	0.67***	0.46***	0.85
WSMU (5)	0.47***	0.40***	0.38***	0.42***	0.77
FSMU (6)	0.23**	0.29**	0.21*	0.27**	0.35**	--
HTMT ratio
Workplace FoMO (1)	--
IP (2)	0.29	–
OS (3)	0.45	0.48	–
RP (4)	0.40	0.82	0.55	–
WSMU (5)	0.53	0.46	0.43	0.51	--
FSMU (6)	0.25	0.31	0.23	0.30	0.37	–

	1	2	3	4	5	6
Fornell-Larcker criterion
Workplace FoMO (1)	0.80
IP (2)	0.26*	0.87
OS (3)	0.38**	0.41***	0.84
RP (4)	0.33**	0.67***	0.46***	0.85
WSMU (5)	0.47***	0.40***	0.38***	0.42***	0.77
FSMU (6)	0.23**	0.29**	0.21*	0.27**	0.35**	--
HTMT ratio
Workplace FoMO (1)	--
IP (2)	0.29	–
OS (3)	0.45	0.48	–
RP (4)	0.40	0.82	0.55	–
WSMU (5)	0.53	0.46	0.43	0.51	--
FSMU (6)	0.25	0.31	0.23	0.30	0.37	–

Note(s): α = Cronbach’s alpha, CR = Composite reliability, AVE = Average variance extracted, rho_A = Dijkstra-Henseler’s rho, Workplace FoMO = Workplace Fear of missing out, OS = Organizational support, WRSMU = Work-related social media use, FSMU = Frequency of social media use, RP = Routine work performance, IP = Innovative work performance Significance of Correlations: *p < 0.050, **p < 0.010, ***p < 0.001

Source(s): Authors’ own work

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable