Post on 14-Mar-2018
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 2
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,
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 3
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
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 4
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
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 5
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
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 6
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 7
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
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 9 Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure
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
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 11 Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure
“Completely Agree”)
Satisfaction with My Supervisor Scale (SWMSS)
18 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Very Dissatisfied” to 5 = “Very Satisfied”)
Original Measure: Scarpello & Vandenberg, 1987 Measure Updates and Validation Work: Jones, Scarpello, & Bergmann, 1999
Satisfaction with Work Schedule Flexibility
5 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Very Dissatisfied” to 5 = “Very Satisfied”)
Original Measure: Rothausen, 1994
Momentary Job Satisfaction Experience-sampled Job Satisfaction (from the OJS)
5 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”)
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
20 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”)
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 13
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
12 7-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”)
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
7-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”)
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
9 7-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”)
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
7-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”)
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
6 4-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 4 = “Strongly Agree”)
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
8 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”)
Original Measure: Gregersen & Black, 1992
Supervisor-related Commitment
9 7-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”)
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 16
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 17
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 18
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 19
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 20
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 21
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 22
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.
Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 23
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.