Attitude Towards Zakah on Employment Income : Comparing Outcomes Between Single Score and Multidimensional Scores

Pengarang

  • Kamil Md. Idris School of Accountancy, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia
  • Ahmad Mahdzan Ayob School of Economics Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/mmj2001.5.4

Kata kunci:

Attitude, Zakah, Compliance Behaviour. 5 D

Abstrak

Study on attitude towards regulated social activities have been carried out in many areas (such as tax and zakah payment). However, many of these studies applied a single score of attitude in their analyses. Such a procedure, to some researchers is considered less informative, especially in the study of a complex attitude which has several dimensions. Many researchers have suggested that attitude towards a complex object should be studied by decomposing the object or issue into smaller and less complex elements on the basis of component parts, specific functions, or particular contexts. Thus, this paper offers a comparative study of outcomes between attitude measured by a single summative score and attitude measured by multidimensional factor scores. The object of attitude in this paper is zakah on employment income by eligible Muslim. In the first approach, a total of 24 items of attitude were used to represent the single score of attitude. In the second approach, principal component analysis with varimax ratation was first applied to determine the underlying dimensions of attitude. Each dimension was then named and treated as anew variable, each measured by the factor scores. Both approach were applied separately to an analysis on compliance behavior of zakah on employment income. Results suggest that attitude measured by multidimensionality scores is more informative as compared to the single summative score. Futher, the use of multidimensional scores in multivariate logistic regression improved the goodness of fit of the model over that of the single score of attitude. Thus, this improvement affects the interpretation of the whole model with respect to the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable, which is zakah compliance.

 

Muat turun

Muat turun data belum tersedia.

Rujukan

Andreoni, J., Errard, B. & Feinstein, J. (1998). Tax compliance. Journal of Economic Lit-erature, 36(2), 818-860

Bennett, S. & Bowers, D. (1976). An Introduc-tion to Multivariate Techniques for Social and Behavioral Sciences. New York: John Wiley and Sons

Bobek, D. (1997). Tax fairness How do indi-viduals judge fairness and what effect does It have on their behavior. Ph.D. Dis-sertation, University of Florida, Gainesville

Churchill, G.A. Jr. (1979). A paradigm for de-veloping better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64-73

Coakes,S.J. & Steed, L.G. (1999). SPSS Analysis Without Anguish. Brisbane, Australia: John Wiley & Sons

Dyer, J.E & Osborne, E.W. (1996). A factor analysis of attitudes of Illinois guidance counselors towards agriculture programs. From http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/ SSU/AGED/naerm/s-d-4.htm

Eriksen, K. & Fallan L. (1996). Tax knowledge and attitudes toward taxation: a report on a quasi experiment. Journal of Economic Psychology, 17(3), 387-402

Fischer, C.M., Wartick, M., & Mark, M.M. (1992). Detection probability and taxpayer compliance A review of the literature. Journal of Accounting Literature, 11, 1-46

Hair, et al. (1995). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall

Hajah Mustafa, M.H. (1996). An evaluation of the Malaysian tax administrative system, and taxpayer’s perceptions towards as-sessment system, tax law fairness, and tax law complexity. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia

Jackson, B.R. & Milliron, V.C. (1986). Tax com-pliance research: findings, problems and prospects. Journal of Accounting Literature, 5, 125-165

Johnson, R. A. & Wichern, D. W. (1992). Ap-plied Multivariate Statistical Analysis (3rd. ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall

Kim, J.O. & Mueller, C.W. (1978). Factor Analy-sis Statistical Methods and Practical Issues. Beverly Hills: Sage Publication

Lawver, D.E. & Fraze,S.D. (1996). Factor analy-sis of variables related to student atti-tudes and perceptions concerning agri-cultural mechanics laboratory safety. From http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/ SSU/AGED/naerm/s-k-1.htm

Lewis, A. (1982). The Psychology of Taxation. Oxford: Martin Robertson. Malaysian Management Journal 5 (1&2), 47-63 (2001) DO

Menard, S. (1995). Applied Logistic Regression Analysis. London: Sage Publication

Mueller, D.J. (1986). Measuring Social Attitudes. Columbia University, New York: Teach-ers College

Mujaini Tarimin (1995). Zakat penggajian Satu penilaian terbaru di Malaysia. Tesis é PhD, Universiti Malaya, Malaysia. u Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Oo)

Oskamp, S. (1991). Attitudes and Opinions (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall

Peter, J.P. (1981, May). Construct validity A review of basicissues and marketing prac-tices. Journal of Marketing Research, 13, 52-7..UUM sse=dekaran, U. (2000). Research Methods for Busi-ness. New York: John Wiley & Sons. //mm http

Sherif, M. & Hovland, C.L (1961). Social judge-ment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. New Haven: Yale University Press

Silver, D.P. (1995). Tax compliance and tax-payer attitude Over the last forty years, this country has experienced a taxpayer revolt. National Public Accountant, 40 (11), 32-35

Spicer, M. W. & Lundstedt, S. B. (1976). Under-standing tax evasion. Public Finance, 31 (2), 295-305

Sutinen, J.G. & Kuperan K. (1999). A socioeco-nomic theory of regulatory compliance. International Journal of Social Economics, 26 (1,2,3), 174-193

Tayib, M. (1998). The determinants of assess-ment tax collection The Malaysian local authority experience. PhD. Dissertation, University of Glamorgan. Malaysian Management Journal 5 (1&2), 47-63 (2001)

Diterbitkan

2001-12-01

Cara Memetik

Md. Idris, K., & Ayob, A. M. (2001). Attitude Towards Zakah on Employment Income : Comparing Outcomes Between Single Score and Multidimensional Scores. Malaysian Management Journal, 5(1&2), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.32890/mmj2001.5.4

##plugins.generic.citations.panel.title##

##plugins.generic.citations.panel.harvested## 2026-09-07
0 ##plugins.generic.citations.panel.citationsNone##

##plugins.generic.citations.panel.body##

##plugins.generic.citations.panel.identifiers## DOI 10.32890/mmj2001.5.4