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 1.) Ability Utilization LF: 100 5-point Likert Original Measure:
Satisfaction 2.) Achievement SF: 20 scale (from 1 = Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967; Dawis,
Questionnaire (MSQ) 3.) Activity “very dissatisfied” Dohm, Lofquist, Chartrand, & Due, 1987
4.) Advancement to 5 = “very
5.) Authority satisfied”) Measure Updates and Validation Work:
6.) Company Policies
Gillet & Schwab, 1975; Bledsoe & Brown, 1977;
7.) Compensation
8.) Coworkers Katz & Van Maanen, 1977; Scarpello & Campbell,
9.) Creativity 1983; Hauber & Bruininks, 1986; Pierce,
10.) Independence McTavish, & Knudsen, 1986; Spector, 1997;
11.) Security Hirschfeld, 2000; Hancer & George, 2004
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

Job Descriptive Index 1.) Coworkers LF: 72 “Yes”, Original Measure:

(JDI) 2.) The Work Itself SF: 30 “Uncertain”, “No” Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969
3.) Pay
4.) Opportunities for Promotion
 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 1.) Job Security 14 7-point scale Original Measure:

Survey (JDS) 2.) Pay and Other (from 1 = Hackman & Oldham, 1974, 1975, 1976
Compensation “Extremely
3.) Peers and Coworkers Dissatisfied” to Measure Updates and Validation Work:
4.) Supervision “Extremely Fried & Ferris, 1987; Munz, Huelsman, Konold, &
5.) Opportunity for Personal
Satisfied”) McKinney, 1996
Growth and Development
on the Job

Index of 1.) Supervision LF: 42 7-point scale Original Measure:

Organizational 2.) Company Identification SF: 16 (from 1 = Smith, 1976; Dunham, Smith, & Blackburn, 1977;
Reactions (IOR) 3.) Kind of Work “Extremely Dunham & Smith, 1979
4.) Amount of Work Dissatisfied” to
5.) Coworkers “Extremely Measure Updates and Validation Work:
6.) Physical Work Conditions
Satisfied”) Bluedorn, 1979; Goffin & Jackson, 1988
7.) Financial Rewards
8.) Career Future

Job Satisfaction 1.) Pay 36 6-point Likert Original Measure:

Survey (JSS) 2.) Promotion scale (1 = Spector, 1985
3.) Supervision “Disagree Very
4.) Fringe Benefits Much” to 6 =
5.) Contingent Rewards “Agree Very
6.) Operating Conditions
Much”)
 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 18 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Satisfaction Scale scale (from 1 = Brayfield & Rothe, 1951
(OJS) “Strongly
Disagree” to 5 = Measure Updates and Validation Work:
“Strongly Agree”) Price & Mueller, 1981; Khaleque & Rahman, 1987

Faces Scale 1-10 100-point scale Original Measure:

rating faces with Kunin, 1955
varied affective
expression (see Measure Updates and Validation Work:
Table 2 from Dunham & Herman, 1975; Elfering & Grebner,
Kunin, 1955) 2010, 2011

General Satisfaction LF: 5 7-point scale Original Measure:

(from the JDS) SF: 3 (from 1 = Hackman & Oldham, 1975
“Extremely
Dissatisfied” to
“Extremely
Satisfied”)

Satisfaction (from the 3 7-point Likert- Original Measure:

Michigan type scale (from 1 Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klesh, 1979
Organizational = “Disagree” to 5
Assessment) = “Agree”) 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 15 7-point scale Original Measure:

Satisfaction (from 1 = Warr, Cook, & Wall, 1979
“Extremely
Dissatisfied” to
“Extremely
Satisfied”)

Job In General (JIG; LF: 18 “Yes”, Original Measure:

to supplement the SF: 8 “Uncertain”, “No” Ironson, Smith, Brannick, Gibson, & Paul, 1989
JDI)
Measure Updates and Validation Work:
Russell, Spitzmüller, Lin, Stanton, Smith, &
Ironson, 2004

Specific Facets of Job Satisfaction

Pay Satisfaction 1.) Pay Level 18 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Questionnaire (PSQ) 2.) Benefits scale (from 1 = Heneman & Schwab, 1985
3.) Raises “Very
4.) Pay Structure/ Dissatisfied” to 5 Measure Updates and Validation Work:
Administration = “Very Judge, 1993; DeConinck, Stilwell, & Brock, 1996;
Satisfied”) Shaw, Duffy, Jenkins, & Gupta, 1999; Lievens,
Anseel, Harris, & Eisenberg, 2007

Employee 8 7-point Likert Original Measure:

Satisfaction with scale (1 = Rosen, Klein, & Young, 1986
Ownership (ESOP) “Completely
Disagree” to 7 = 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 18 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Supervisor Scale scale (from 1 = Scarpello & Vandenberg, 1987
(SWMSS) “Very
Dissatisfied” to 5 Measure Updates and Validation Work:
= “Very Jones, Scarpello, & Bergmann, 1999
Satisfied”)

Satisfaction with 5 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Work Schedule scale (from 1 = Rothausen, 1994
Flexibility “Very
Dissatisfied” to 5
= “Very
Satisfied”)

Momentary Job Satisfaction

Experience-sampled 5 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Job Satisfaction (from scale (from 1 = Ilies & Judge, 2002
the OJS) “Strongly
Disagree” to 5 =
“Strongly Agree”)

Job Satisfaction (from 2-3 5-point Likert Original Measure:

the Michigan scale (from 1 = Ilies & Judge, 2002; Gabriel, Diefendorff, Chandler,
Organizational “Strongly Moran, & Greguras, 2014
Assessment) Disagree” to 5 =
“Strongly Agree”)
 Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 12

Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure

Momentary Task 1 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Satisfaction scale (from 1 = Fisher, 2003
“Dissatisfied” to 5
= “Satisfied”)

Event Reconstruction 1 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Method (ERM) Job scale (from 1 = Grube, Schroer, Hentzschel, & Hertel, 2008
Satisfaction “Dissatisfied” to 5
= “Satisfied”)

Job Satisfaction (from 1.) Supervision 20 5-point Likert Original Measure:

the JSS) 2.) Coworkers scale (from 1 = Rudolph, Clark, Jundt, & Baltes, in press
3.) Pay “Strongly
4.) Promotion Disagree” to 5 =
5.) Nature of Work “Strongly Agree”)

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 1.) Identification LF: 9 7-point Likert Original Measure:

Commitment Scale 2.) Involvement SF: 6 scale (from 1 = Cook & Wall, 1980
(BOCS) 3.) Loyalty “Strongly
Disagree” to 7 = Measure Updates and Validation Work:
“Strongly Agree”) Oliver, 1990; Peccei & Guest, 1993; Furnham,
Brewin, & O’Kelly, 1994; Fenton-O’Creevy,
Winfrow, Lydka, & Morris, 1997; Mathews &
Shepherd, 2002

Psychological 1.) Internalization 12 7-point Likert Original Measure:

Attachment 2.) Identification scale (from 1 = O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986
Instrument 3.) Compliance “Strongly
Disagree” to 7 = Measure Updates and Validation Work:
“Strongly Agree”) Caldwell, Chatman, & O’Reilly, 1990; Sutton &
Harrison, 1993; Martin & Bennett, 1996

Three-component 1.) Affective LF: 24 7-point Likert Original Measure:

Model of 2.) Normative SF: 18 scale (from 1 = Allen & Meyer, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1991
Organizational 3.) Continuance “Strongly
Commitment (TCM) Disagree” to 7 = Measure Updates and Validation Work:
“Strongly Agree”) 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 1.) Identification 9 7-point Likert Original Measure:

Commitment Scale 2.) Affiliation scale (from 1 = Balfour & Wechsler, 1996
(OCS) 3.) Exchange “Strongly
Disagree” to 7 = Measure Updates and Validation Work:
“Strongly Agree”) Kacmar, Carlson, & Brymer, 1999

Global (Overall) Organizational Commitment

Organizational LF: 15 7-point Likert Original Measure:

Commitment SF: 9 scale (from 1 = Porter et al., 1974; Mowday, Steers, & Porter, 1979
Questionnaire (OCQ) “Strongly
Disagree” to 7 = Measure Updates and Validation Work:
“Strongly Agree”) Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Mathieu & Farr,
1991; Cohen, 1996; Kacmar, Carlson, & Brymer,
1999

Organizational 6 4-point Likert Original Measure:

Commitment scale (from 1 = Marsden, Kalleberg, & Cook, 1993
“Strongly
Disagree” to 4 =
“Strongly Agree”)

Specific Facets of Organizational Commitment

Career Commitment 7 5-point Likert Original Measure:

scale (from 1 = Blau, 1985, 1989
“Strongly
Disagree” to 5 =
“Strongly Agree”)
 Job Attitudes, Job Satisfaction, and Job Affect – Supplementary Materials 15

Measure Name Facet(s) Items Scaling Studies Developing and Validating Measure

Commitment to a 8 5-point Likert Original Measure:

Parent Company scale (from 1 = Gregersen & Black, 1992
Versus Local “Strongly
Operation Disagree” to 5 =
“Strongly Agree”)

Supervisor-related 9 7-point Likert Original Measure:

Commitment scale (from 1 = Becker, Billings, Eveleth, & Gilbert, 1996
“Strongly
Disagree” to 7 =
“Strongly Agree”)

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.