measures and methods - american psychological...

Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 1

The following online supplemental materials includes a review of measures of attitudes,

Table A, which outlines the facets, number of items, scaling, and references for Job Satisfaction,

and Table B, which outlines the facets, number of items, scaling, and references for

Organizational Commitment measures. References for the development and validation work

cited across these tables are included in a section at the end of the document.

Measures and Methods

Psychological constructs pose measurement challenges; job attitudes are no exception.

Solving or ameliorating those challenges depends on what kind of job attitudes one is treating;

hence, we divide our discussion into two parts: (a) Questionnaires and dimensionality, where we

discuss measurement issues in the way job satisfaction and commitment have typically been

conceptualized and measured, and (b) Job affect, mood, and emotions, where we discuss

challenges and methodologies based on new conceptualizations of job affect.

Questionnaires and Dimensionality

The central theoretical question regarding dimensionality concerns the relationship of

facets of job attitudes with a general attitude, as well as the distinction between “satisfaction”

versus “commitment.” In the earliest years of systematic study, ad-hoc, unvalidated measures of

job attitudes dominated. Many studies incorporated single-item measures. Though some have

argued that such single-item measures are not wholly unreliable (Wanous, Reichers, & Hudy,

1997), any global measure has limited ability to identify the underlying structure of attitudes

(Scarpello & Campbell, 1983) and nearly always will be less reliable (Loo, 2002). Multi-item

scales came to be preferred, as factor analysis became the dominant approach to assessing

attitude dimensionality. Other work has looked at differential correlations with theoretically

grounded antecedents and outcomes.


An overview of commonly utilized job satisfaction and commitment measures are

presented in online supplemental materials. Along with scale information, these tables include a

list of measure development and validation work that has been carried out on each scale since

initial development. Furthermore, echoing the focus on dimensionality as previously discussed,

each table is divided into multiple sections including multi-faceted measures, overall measures,

specific facet measures, and momentary measures of job satisfaction, as well as commonly used

commitment scales. In the following sections, we will describe many of these measures with

respect to their positioning in the development of attitudes measurement as a whole—especially

in terms of their contribution to the debate over using global or multi-faceted attitudes measures.

Over time, the JDI (Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969; modified by Roznowski, 1989) and

the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ; Dawis, Dohm, Lofquist, Chartrand, & Due,

1987; Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967) became widely used as psychometric evidence

supporting their use and dimensionality was provided. The widespread use of the JDI, in

particular, reflects psychometric research that goes beyond the factor analytic approach (e.g.,

Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, et al. 1997; Hanisch, 1992; Roznowski, 1989).

For example, careful attention devoted to item comprehensibility/readability allows the JDI to be

administered without modification to employees with less education and/or lower reading ability

(Stone, Stone, & Gueutal, 1990). The five scales that compose the JDI have also been used

extensively as antecedents and outcomes of job attitudes in a variety of studies ranging from

community characteristics and their effects on job attitudes (Kendall, 1963; Hulin, 1969) to

longitudinal studies of the effects of sexual harassment (Glomb, Munson, Hulin, Bergman, &

Drasgow, 1999). The accumulated empirical research on the JDI provides researchers with the

evidence necessary to evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity of this set of scales,


including relations with behavioral variables (Kinicki, McKee-Ryan, Schriesheim, & Carson,

2002).

The rise of research on commitment led to similar questions regarding dimensionality.

Given the similarity in item content between commitment and satisfaction scales, and the

expectation that both constructs will have similar antecedents (e.g., positive interactions with the

organization and job) and consequences (e.g., motivation to work and remain in an organization),

there is good reason to question whether a distinction is useful or appropriate. One foundational

study did find that commitment incrementally predicted turnover beyond satisfaction (Porter,

Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974). Subsequent confirmatory factor analytic studies showed

better model fit when job satisfaction and organizational commitment were treated as distinct

constructs (e.g., Brooke, Russell, & Price, 1988; Mathieu & Farr, 1991). Prior work on the

dimensionality of job satisfaction anticipated this result, as satisfaction questions pertain to

elements of the job, whereas commitment typically addresses attitudes toward the organization.

People seem able to differentiate specific jobs from the organization as a whole. Whether people

can distinguish commitment toward an object from satisfaction with that same object is more

problematic.

Commitment researchers began to consider multiple foci or forms of commitment. In the

same way that satisfaction with one’s supervisor, co-workers, and organization as a whole can be

distinguished, researchers identified distinct forms of commitment to top management,

supervisors, work groups (Becker, 1992), commitment to one’s occupation (Irving, Coleman, &

Cooper, 1997), or commitment to one’s labor union (Gordon, Philpot, Burt, Thompson, &

Spiller, 1980). Another distinction was drawn between affective commitment toward the

organization, perceived alternative jobs and costs of leaving (continuance), and a sense of social


obligation to remain in the organization (normative) (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Factor analyses and

longitudinal analyses showed that these constructs could be readily separated (Irving et al., 1997;

Meyer, Allen, & Gellatly, 1990; Meyer, Allen, & Smith, 1993).

Although research has emphasized multiple dimensions of job attitudes, there is still a

question if a well-designed aggregate measure captures a distinct construct. Early validation

efforts proceeded from the principle that a single overall attitude towards a job was distinct from

facet attitudes (Brayfield & Rothe, 1951; Wanous & Lawler 1972). A number of advantages to a

general scale can be identified (Ironson, Smith, Brannick, Gibson, & Paul, 1989). First,

composites made up of sub-facets may not capture what is important to a specific respondent.

Second, composites also fail to reflect the complex and idiosyncratic internal psychological

process by which individuals form an overall attitude toward their job. Supporting these

contentions, empirical evidence has demonstrated that facet scales may be more related to

supervision or compensation policies; but intention to remain, trust in the organization, and life

satisfaction are more closely related to an overall attitude (Ironson et al., 1989). Other work has

also shown that a general factor of job attitudes is a better predictor of overall patterns of

behavior than any of the lower order constituent attitudes (Harrison, Newman, & Roth, 2006).

Although there does seem to be an empirical distinction between ratings of the job as a

whole versus measures of specific facets of a job, it is also clear that not all facets are as central

to most workers’ conception of “the job.” Results from Ironson et al. (1989) show that the JDI

work scale has an uncorrected correlation of r=.78 with the job in general scale, and similarly

high correlations with the Brayfield-Rothe (1951) and faces (Kunin, 1955) scales. Correlations

with other facets are systematically much lower. Wanous et al. (1997) also found that the

correlation between task satisfaction and a single item description of overall job satisfaction was


nearly equivalent to the correlation between a summary score across facets relative with the

overall measure. In sum, it appears that when most individuals are asked “are you satisfied with

your job” without further qualification, they mostly mean satisfaction with the work they are

doing. Interestingly, there is also a strong positive correlation between task satisfaction and

organizational commitment (Kinicki et al., 2002; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990), with corrected

correlations around rc=0.60, which is stronger than correlations with other facets of satisfaction.

Job Affect, Mood, and Emotions

The measurement of affective components of a job creates multiple challenges. While of

older studies of job attitudes did allow for the possibility that attitudes could change over time,

traditional measures treated attitudes as largely stable, and were administered at a single point in

time. The affective perspective on job attitudes, however, takes a more episodic approach. By

their very nature, moods and emotions fluctuate from day to day and in reaction to specific

events (Tellegen, Watson, & Clark, 1999; Watson, 2000). To capture changes in job affect, it is

not just the nature of questions that must be changed, but the timing and frequency of measures

must also be taken into account.

One of the most critical issues for assessing the affective component of job attitudes is

selecting the appropriate time at which questions should be asked (Beal & Weiss, 2003). By their

very nature, events that generate strong emotional reactions are unlikely to be planned in

advance. Moreover, the timing of these events matters a great deal—a major job event

experienced the same day one completes an attitude survey may generate quite different

responses than the same event experienced six months before one completes an attitude survey.

Some studies have taken the approach of randomly sampling moods during the course of the day

and then seeing how the measures of job affect at specific moments correspond to the events in


the workplace. Other studies measure affect through daily measures at the start, middle, or end of

the work day. While seldom employed in research for several decades, the use of diaries to link

experiences at work with emotions harkens back to early studies in organizational psychology

(Hersey, 1932). This approach is surely more convenient and tractable, but obviously generates

concerns about recall biases and other post-event reconstruction of the antecedents of the

affective event, the cognitions and affect experienced at the time, and the behavioral reactions.

Besides the timing of measurement, the study of affect and job attitudes also requires

evaluation of discrete emotions, rather than the general positivity or negativity of one’s

appraisals. The dimensional perspective on emotion has been a central part of research on affect

in organizational psychology. As such, positive and negative affect as well as the rotated poles of

hedonic tone and intensity, feature prominently in empirical studies (Cropanzano & Wright,

2001). However, emotion researchers propose that reactions to very specific events can generate

different core emotions (Russell, 2003). For example, anger, frustration, guilt, or fear would all

fit as negative affect with high arousal and a negative tone, but might feel very different to the

individual experiencing the emotions and would have very different implications for behavior.


Table A Job Satisfaction Measures Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure Comprehensive (Multi-Faceted) Job Satisfaction Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ)

1.) Ability Utilization 2.) Achievement 3.) Activity 4.) Advancement 5.) Authority 6.) Company Policies 7.) Compensation 8.) Coworkers 9.) Creativity 10.) Independence 11.) Security 12.) Social Service 13.) Social Status 14.) Moral Values 15.) Recognition 16.) Responsibility 17.) Supervision: Human

Relations 18.) Supervision: Technical 19.) Variety 20.) Working Conditions

LF: 100 SF: 20

5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “very dissatisfied” to 5 = “very satisfied”)

Original Measure: Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967; Dawis, Dohm, Lofquist, Chartrand, & Due, 1987 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Gillet & Schwab, 1975; Bledsoe & Brown, 1977; Katz & Van Maanen, 1977; Scarpello & Campbell, 1983; Hauber & Bruininks, 1986; Pierce, McTavish, & Knudsen, 1986; Spector, 1997; Hirschfeld, 2000; Hancer & George, 2004

Job Descriptive Index (JDI)

1.) Coworkers 2.) The Work Itself 3.) Pay 4.) Opportunities for Promotion

LF: 72 SF: 30

“Yes”, “Uncertain”, “No”

Original Measure: Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969

Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 8 Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure

5.) Supervision Measure Updates and Validation Work: Gillet & Schwab, 1975; Cook, Hepworth, Wall, & Warr, 1981; Ironson et al., 1989; Roznowski, 1989; Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, et al., 1997; Spector, 1997; Kinicki, McKee-Ryan, Schriesheim, & Carson, 2002; Nagy, 2002; Carter & Dalal, 2010

Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS)

1.) Job Security 2.) Pay and Other

Compensation 3.) Peers and Coworkers 4.) Supervision 5.) Opportunity for Personal

Growth and Development on the Job

14 7-point scale (from 1 = “Extremely Dissatisfied” to “Extremely Satisfied”)

Original Measure: Hackman & Oldham, 1974, 1975, 1976 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Fried & Ferris, 1987; Munz, Huelsman, Konold, & McKinney, 1996

Index of Organizational Reactions (IOR)

1.) Supervision 2.) Company Identification 3.) Kind of Work 4.) Amount of Work 5.) Coworkers 6.) Physical Work Conditions 7.) Financial Rewards 8.) Career Future

LF: 42 SF: 16

7-point scale (from 1 = “Extremely Dissatisfied” to “Extremely Satisfied”)

Original Measure: Smith, 1976; Dunham, Smith, & Blackburn, 1977; Dunham & Smith, 1979 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Bluedorn, 1979; Goffin & Jackson, 1988

Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)

1.) Pay 2.) Promotion 3.) Supervision 4.) Fringe Benefits 5.) Contingent Rewards 6.) Operating Conditions

36 6-point Likert scale (1 = “Disagree Very Much” to 6 = “Agree Very Much”)

Original Measure: Spector, 1985


7.) Coworkers 8.) Nature of Work 9.) Communication

Global (Overall) Job Satisfaction Overall Job Satisfaction Scale (OJS)

18 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”)

Original Measure: Brayfield & Rothe, 1951 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Price & Mueller, 1981; Khaleque & Rahman, 1987

Faces Scale 1-10 100-point scale

rating faces with varied affective expression (see Table 2 from Kunin, 1955)

Original Measure: Kunin, 1955 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Dunham & Herman, 1975; Elfering & Grebner, 2010, 2011

General Satisfaction (from the JDS)

LF: 5 SF: 3

7-point scale (from 1 = “Extremely Dissatisfied” to “Extremely Satisfied”)

Original Measure: Hackman & Oldham, 1975

Satisfaction (from the Michigan Organizational Assessment)

3 7-point Likert-type scale (from 1 = “Disagree” to 5 = “Agree”)

Original Measure: Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klesh, 1979 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Bowling & Hammond, 2008

Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 10 Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure Global Job Satisfaction

15 7-point scale (from 1 = “Extremely Dissatisfied” to “Extremely Satisfied”)

Original Measure: Warr, Cook, & Wall, 1979

Job In General (JIG; to supplement the JDI)

LF: 18 SF: 8

“Yes”, “Uncertain”, “No”

Original Measure: Ironson, Smith, Brannick, Gibson, & Paul, 1989 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Russell, Spitzmüller, Lin, Stanton, Smith, & Ironson, 2004

Specific Facets of Job Satisfaction Pay Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ)

1.) Pay Level 2.) Benefits 3.) Raises 4.) Pay Structure/

Administration

18 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Very Dissatisfied” to 5 = “Very Satisfied”)

Original Measure: Heneman & Schwab, 1985 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Judge, 1993; DeConinck, Stilwell, & Brock, 1996; Shaw, Duffy, Jenkins, & Gupta, 1999; Lievens, Anseel, Harris, & Eisenberg, 2007

Employee Satisfaction with Ownership (ESOP)

8 7-point Likert scale (1 = “Completely Disagree” to 7 =

Original Measure: Rosen, Klein, & Young, 1986 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Buchko, 1992


“Completely Agree”)

Satisfaction with My Supervisor Scale (SWMSS)


Original Measure: Scarpello & Vandenberg, 1987 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Jones, Scarpello, & Bergmann, 1999

Satisfaction with Work Schedule Flexibility


Original Measure: Rothausen, 1994

Momentary Job Satisfaction Experience-sampled Job Satisfaction (from the OJS)


Original Measure: Ilies & Judge, 2002

Job Satisfaction (from the Michigan Organizational Assessment)

2-3 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”)

Original Measure: Ilies & Judge, 2002; Gabriel, Diefendorff, Chandler, Moran, & Greguras, 2014

Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 12 Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure Momentary Task Satisfaction

1 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Dissatisfied” to 5 = “Satisfied”)

Original Measure: Fisher, 2003

Event Reconstruction Method (ERM) Job Satisfaction

1 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Dissatisfied” to 5 = “Satisfied”)

Original Measure: Grube, Schroer, Hentzschel, & Hertel, 2008

Job Satisfaction (from the JSS)

1.) Supervision 2.) Coworkers 3.) Pay 4.) Promotion 5.) Nature of Work


Original Measure: Rudolph, Clark, Jundt, & Baltes, in press

Notes. LF = Long Form, SF = Short Form. Measure updates and validation evidence presented in chronological order for parsimony. Measure updates and validation evidence did not include versions of the scales altered for specific contexts, languages, or populations.


Table B Organizational Commitment Measures Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure Comprehensive (Multi-Faceted) Organizational Commitment British Organizational Commitment Scale (BOCS)

1.) Identification 2.) Involvement 3.) Loyalty

LF: 9 SF: 6

7-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”)

Original Measure: Cook & Wall, 1980 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Oliver, 1990; Peccei & Guest, 1993; Furnham, Brewin, & O’Kelly, 1994; Fenton-O’Creevy, Winfrow, Lydka, & Morris, 1997; Mathews & Shepherd, 2002

Psychological Attachment Instrument

1.) Internalization 2.) Identification 3.) Compliance


Original Measure: O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Caldwell, Chatman, & O’Reilly, 1990; Sutton & Harrison, 1993; Martin & Bennett, 1996

Three-component Model of Organizational Commitment (TCM)

1.) Affective 2.) Normative 3.) Continuance

LF: 24 SF: 18


Original Measure: Allen & Meyer, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1991 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Jaros, Jermier, Koehler, & Sincich, 1993; Irving, Coleman, & Cooper, 1997; Meyer & Allen, 1997; Cohen, 1999; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsksy, 2002

Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 14 Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure Organizational Commitment Scale (OCS)

1.) Identification 2.) Affiliation 3.) Exchange


Original Measure: Balfour & Wechsler, 1996 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Kacmar, Carlson, & Brymer, 1999

Global (Overall) Organizational Commitment Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)

LF: 15 SF: 9


Original Measure: Porter et al., 1974; Mowday, Steers, & Porter, 1979 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Mathieu & Farr, 1991; Cohen, 1996; Kacmar, Carlson, & Brymer, 1999

Organizational Commitment


Original Measure: Marsden, Kalleberg, & Cook, 1993

Specific Facets of Organizational Commitment Career Commitment 7 5-point Likert

scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”)

Original Measure: Blau, 1985, 1989

Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 15 Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure Commitment to a Parent Company Versus Local Operation


Original Measure: Gregersen & Black, 1992

Supervisor-related Commitment


Original Measure: Becker, Billings, Eveleth, & Gilbert, 1996

Notes. LF = Long Form, SF = Short Form. Measure updates and validation evidence presented in chronological order for parsimony. Measure updates and validation evidence did not include versions of the scales altered for specific contexts, languages, or populations.


References

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.

Balfour, D. L., & Wechsler, B. (1996). Organizational commitment: Antecedents and outcomes

in public organizations. Public Productivity & Management Review, 19, 256-277. Balzer, W. K., Kihm, J. A., Smith, P. C., Irwin, J. L., Bachiochi, P. D., Robie, C., et al. (1997).

User’s manual for the Job Descriptive Index (JDI; 1997 Revision) and the Job in General (JIG) scales. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University.

Beal, D. J., & Weiss, H. M. (2003). Methods of ecological momentary assessment in

organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 440–464. Becker, T. E. (1992). Foci and bases of commitment: Are they distinctions worth making?

Academy of Management Journal, 35, 232–244. Becker, T. E., Billings, R. S., Eveleth, D. M., & Gilbert, N. L. (1996). Foci and bases of

employee commitment: Implications for job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 464-482.

Blau, G. J. (1985). The measurement and prediction of career commitment. Journal of

Occupational Psychology, 58, 277-288. Blau, G. J. (1989). Testing the generalizability of a career commitment measure and its impact

on employee turnover. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 35, 88-103. Bledsoe, J. C., & Brown, S. E. (1977). Factor structure of the Minnesota Satisfaction

Questionnaire. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 45, 301-302. Bluedorn, A. C. (1979). Validating the Index of Organizational Reactions: A Replication.

Replications in Social Psychology, 1, 51-54. Bowling, N. A., & Hammond, G. D. (2008). A meta-analytic examination of the construct

validity of the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire job satisfaction subscale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 63-77.

Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 35, 307–311. Brooke, P. P., Russell, D. W., & Price, J. L. (1988). Discriminant validation of measures of job

satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 139–145.


Buchko, A. A. (1992). Employee ownership, attitudes, and turnover: An empirical assessment. Human Relations, 45, 711-733.

Caldwell, D. F., Chatman, J. A., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1990). Building organizational commitment:

A multifirm study. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 245-261. Carter, N. T., & Dalal, D. K. (2010). An ideal point account of the JDI work satisfaction scale.

Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 743-748. Cohen, A. (1996). On the discriminant validity of the Meyer and Allen measure of organizational

commitment: How does it fit with the work commitment construct? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 494-503.

Cohen, A. (1999). Relationships among five forms of commitment: An empirical

assessment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 285-308. Cook, J. D., Hepworth, S. J., Wall, T. D., & Warr, P. B. (1981). The experience of work: A

compendium and review of 249 measures and their use. San Diego, CA: Academic Press Limited.

Cook, J. D., & Wall, T. D. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational

commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 39-52.

Cropanzano, R., & Wright, T. A. (2001). When a "happy" worker is really a "productive"

worker: A review and further refinement of the happy-productive worker thesis. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53, 182-199.

Dawis, R. V., Dohm, T. E., Lofquist, L. H., Chartrand, J. M., & Due, A. M. (1987). Minnesota

Occupational Classification System III. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. DeConinck, J. B., Stilwell, C. D., & Brock, B. A. (1996). A construct validity analysis of scores

on measures of distributive justice and pay satisfaction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 1026-1036.

Dunham, R. B., & Herman, J. B. (1975). Development of a Female Faces Scale for measuring

job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 629-631. Dunham, R. B., & Smith, F. J. (1979). Organizational surveys. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Dunham, R. B., Smith, F. J., & Blackburn, R. S. (1977). Validation of the Index of

Organizational Reactions with the JDI, the MSQ, and Faces Scales. Academy of Management Journal, 20, 420-432.

Elfering, A., & Grebner, S. (2010). A smile is just a smile: But only for men. sex differences in

meaning of Faces Scales. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 179-191.


Elfering, A., & Grebner, S. (2011). On the intra- and interindividual differences in the meaning

of smileys: Does this face show job satisfaction? Swiss Journal of Psychology, 70, 13-23. Fenton-O’Creevy, M. P., Winfrow, P., Lydka, H., & Morris, T. (1997). Company prospects and

employee commitment: An analysis of the dimensionality of the BOCS and the influence of external events on those dimensions. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 35, 593–608.

Fisher, C. D. (2003). Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance are correlated?

possible sources of a commonsense theory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 753-777.

Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the Job Characteristics Model: A review and

meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287–322. Furnham, A., Brewin, C. R., & O'Kelly, H. (1994). Cognitive style and attitudes to work. Human

Relations, 47, 1509-1521. Gabriel, A. S., Diefendorff, J. M., Chandler, M. M., Moran, C. M., & Greguras, G. J. (2014). The

dynamic relationships of work affect and job satisfaction with perceptions of fit. Personnel Psychology, 67, 389-420.

Gillet, B., & Schwab, D. P. (1975). Convergent and discriminant validities of corresponding job

descriptive index and Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 313-317.

Glomb, T. M., Munson, L. J., Hulin, C. L., Bergman, M. E., & Drasgow, F. (1999). Structural

equation models of sexual harassment: Longitudinal explorations and cross-sectional generalizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 14-28.

Goffin, R. D., & Jackson, D. N. (1988). The structural validity of the Index of Organizational

Reactions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 327-347. Gregersen, H. B., & Black, J. S. (1992). Antecedents to commitment to a parent company and a

foreign operation. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 65-90. Grube, A., Schroer, J., Hentzschel, C., & Hertel, G. (2008). The event reconstruction method: An

efficient measure of experience-based job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 669-689.

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1974). The Job Diagnostic Survey: An instrument for the

diagnosis of jobs and the evaluation of job redesign projects (Tech. Rep. No. 4). New Haven, CT: Department of Administrative Sciences, Yale University.


Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a

theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 16, 250–279. Hancer, M., & George, R. T. (2004). Factor structure of the Minnesota Satisfaction

Questionnaire short form for restaurant employees. Psychological Reports, 94, 357-362. Hanisch, K. A. (1992). The Job Descriptive Index revisited: Questions about the question mark.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 377–382. Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L. (2006). How important are job attitudes? Meta-

analytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 305–325.

Hauber, F. A., & Bruininks, R. H. (1986). Intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction among direct-

care staff in residential facilities for mentally retarded people. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 95-105.

Heneman, H., & Schwab, D. (1985). Pay satisfaction: Its dimensional nature and measurement.

International Journal of Psychology, 20, 129–141. Hersey, R. B. (1932). Workers’ emotions in shop and home: A study of individual workers from

the psychological and physiological standpoint. Oxford, England: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Hirschfeld, R. R. (2000). Does revising the intrinsic and extrinsic subscales of the Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire short form make a difference? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 255-270.

Hulin, C. L. (1969). Source of variation in job and life satisfaction: The role of community and

job-related variables. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 279–291. Ilies, R., & Judge, T. A. (2002). Understanding the dynamic relationships among personality,

mood, and job satisfaction: A field experience sampling study. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 1119–1139.

Ironson, G. H., Smith, P. C., Brannick, M. T., Gibson, W. M., & Paul, K. B. (1989).

Construction of a Job in General scale: A comparison of global, composite, and specific measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 193–200.

Irving, P. G., Coleman, D. F., & Cooper, C. L. (1997). Further assessments of a three-component

model of occupational commitment: Generalizability and differences across occupations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 444–452.


Jaros, S. J., Jermier, J. M., Koehler, J. W., & Sincich, T. (1993). Effects of continuance, affective, and moral commitment on the withdrawal process: An evaluation of eight structural equation models. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 951-995.

Jones, F. F., Scarpello, V., & Bergmann, T. (1999). Pay procedures—what makes them fair?

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 129-145. Judge, T. A. (1993). Validity of the dimensions of the pay satisfaction questionnaire: Evidence of

differential prediction. Personnel Psychology, 46, 331-355. Kacmar, K. M., Carlson, D. S., & Brymer, R. A. (1999). Antecedents and consequences of

organizational commitment: A comparison of two scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 976-994.

Katz, R., & Van Maanen, J. (1977). The loci of work satisfaction: Job, interaction, and policy.

Human Relations, 30, 469-486. Kendall, L. M. (1963). Canonical analysis of job satisfaction and behavioral, personal

background, and situational data (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

Khaleque, A., & Rahman, M. A. (1987). Perceived importance of job facets and overall job

satisfaction of industrial workers. Human Relations, 40, 401-415. Kinicki, A. J., McKee-Ryan, F. M., Schriesheim, C. A., & Carson, K. P. (2002). Assessing the

construct validity of the Job Descriptive Index: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 14–32.

Kunin, T. (1955). The construction of a new type of attitude measure. Personnel Psychology, 8,

65–77. Lievens, F., Anseel, F., Harris, M. M., & Eisenberg, J. (2007). Measurement invariance of the

Pay Satisfaction Questionnaire across three countries. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 1042-1051.

Loo, R. (2002). A caveat on using single-item versus multiple-item scales. Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 17, 68-75. Marsden, P. V., Kalleberg, A. L., & Cook, C. R. (1993). Gender differences in organizational

commitment influences of work positions and family roles. Work and Occupations, 20, 368-390.

Martin, C. L., & Bennett, N. (1996). The role of justice judgments in explaining the relationship

between job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Group & Organization Management, 21, 84-104.


Mathieu, J. E., & Farr, J. L. (1991). Further evidence for the discriminant validity of measures of organizational commitment, job involvement, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 127-133.

Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates,

and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological bulletin, 108, 171-194. Mathews, B. P., & Shepherd, J. L. (2002). Dimensionality of cook and wall's (1980) British

Organizational Commitment Scale revisited. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 369-375.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational

commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61–89. Meyer, N. & Allen, J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Gellatly, I. R. (1990). Affective and continuance commitment to the

organization: Evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 710–720.

Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538–551.

Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–52.

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee–organization linkages: The

psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic Press. Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational

commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247. Munz, D. C., Huelsman, T. J., Konold, T. R., & McKinney, J. J. (1996). Are there

methodological and substantive roles for affectivity in Job Diagnostic Survey relationships? Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 795-805.

Nagy, M. S. (2002). Using a single-item approach to measure facet job satisfaction. Journal of

Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 77-86. Oliver, N. (1990). Rewards, investments, alternatives and organizational commitment: Empirical

evidence and theoretical development. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 19-31. O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological

attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492–499.


Peccei, R., & Guest, D. (1993). The dimensionality and stability of organizational commitment:

A longitudinal examination of Cook and Wall's (1980) Organizational Commitment Scale (BOCS). London: London School of Economics and Political Science.

Pierce, J. L., McTavish, D. G., & Knudsen, K. R. (1986). The measurement of job

characteristics: A content and contextual analytic look at scale validity. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 7, 299-313.

Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational

commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 603–609.

Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1981). A causal model of turnover for nurses. Academy of

Management Journal, 24, 543-565. Rosen, C. M., Klein, K. J., & Young, K. M. (1986). Employee ownership in America: The equity

solution. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Rothausen, T. J. (1994). Job satisfaction and the parent worker: The role of flexibility and

rewards. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44, 317-336. Roznowski, M. (1989). Examination of the measurement properties of the Job Descriptive Index

with experimental items. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 805–814. Rudolph, C. W., Clark, M. A., Jundt, D. K., & Baltes, B. B. (in press). Differential reactivity and

the within‐person job stressor–satisfaction relationship. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress. Advance online publication.

Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological

Review, 110, 145–172. Russell, S. S., Spitzmüller, C., Lin, L. F., Stanton, J. M., Smith, P. C., & Ironson, G. H. (2004).

Shorter can also be better: The abridged job in general scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 878-893.

Scarpello, V., & Campbell, J. P. (1983). Job satisfaction: Are all the parts there? Personnel

Psychology 36, 577–600. Scarpello, V., & Vandenberg, R. J. (1987). The satisfaction with my supervisor scale: Its utility

for research and practical applications. Journal of Management, 13, 447-466. Shaw, J. D., Duffy, M. K., Jenkins, G. D., & Gupta, N. (1999). Positive and negative affect,

signal sensitivity, and pay satisfaction. Journal of Management, 25, 189-205.


Smith, J. F. (1976). Index of organizational reactions (IOR). JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 6, No.1265.

Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work

and retirement: A strategy for the study of attitudes. Chicago: Rand McNally. Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the job

satisfaction survey. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 693-713. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Applications, assessment, causes, and consequences.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Stone, E. F., Stone, D. L., & Gueutal, H. G. (1990). Influence of cognitive ability on responses to

questionnaire measures: Measurement precision and missing response problems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 418-427.

Sutton, C. D., & Harrison, A. W. (1993). Validity assessment of compliance, identification, and

internalization as dimensions of organizational commitment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 217-223.

Tellegen, A., Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1999). On the dimensional and hierarchical structure

of affect. Psychological Science, 10, 297-303. Wanous, J. P., & Lawler, E. E. (1972). Measurement and meaning of job satisfaction. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 56, 95–105. Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are

single-item measures? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 247-252. Warr, P. B., Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1979). Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and

aspects of psychological well-being. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52, 129–148. Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.