Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis

Journal of Applied Psychology Copyright 2002 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.
2002, Vol. 87, No. 3, 530 –541 0021-9010/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.3.530
Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis
Timothy A. Judge Daniel Heller and Michael K. Mount

University of Florida University of Iowa
This study reports results of a meta-analysis linking traits from the 5-factor model of personality to
overall job satisfaction. Using the model as an organizing framework, 334 correlations from 163
independent samples were classified according to the model. The estimated true score correlations with
job satisfaction were ⫺.29 for Neuroticism, .25 for Extraversion, .02 for Openness to Experience, .17 for
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Agreeableness, and .26 for Conscientiousness. Results further indicated that only the relations of
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Neuroticism and Extraversion with job satisfaction generalized across studies. As a set, the Big Five traits
had a multiple correlation of .41 with job satisfaction, indicating support for the validity of the
dispositional source of job satisfaction when traits are organized according to the 5-factor model.
Research on the dispositional source of job satisfaction has had sible determinants of job satisfaction in the research literature” (p.
a spotty history in job satisfaction research. The personological 377). When specific traits have been selected for inclusion in
basis of job satisfaction was considered in the earliest treatments of studies of employee attitudes, it generally has been in a piecemeal
job satisfaction. Hoppock (1935), for example, noted a strong fashion. Advances in personality research, however, provide the
correlation between workers’ emotional adjustment and their lev- potential for assimilation and integration.
els of job satisfaction. Similarly, Fisher and Hanna (1931) con- One typology that has been in this research literature is the
cluded that a large part of dissatisfaction resulted from emotional positive affectivity (PA)-negative affectivity (NA) taxonomy of
maladjustment. With some noteworthy exceptions (P. C. Smith, affective temperament (D. Watson, 2000). Research by Watson,
1955; Weitz, 1952), these early considerations of the dispositional Tellegen, and colleagues suggests that affective disposition is
source of job satisfaction lay dormant until the 1980s, when a composed of two facets: PA and NA. High-PA individuals are
series of provocative studies (Arvey, Bouchard, Segal, & Abra- predisposed to experience positive emotionality (e.g., joy, excite-
ham, 1989; Staw, Bell, & Clausen, 1986; Staw & Ross, 1985) led ment, enthusiasm), whereas high-NA individuals are predisposed
to renewed interest in the relationship. In the past 15 years, an to experience negative emotions (e.g., guilt, anger, fear; D.
expanding literature has accumulated, giving general support to the Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). In a meta-analysis of the
argument that job satisfaction is, in part, dispositionally based relation of affectivity to job satisfaction, Connolly and Viswesva-
(House, Shane, & Herold, 1996). Despite this widespread accep- ran (2000) reported true score correlations of PA and NA with job
tance, a broad array of traits has been investigated, and there has satisfaction of .49 (k ⫽ 15) and ⫺.33 (k ⫽ 27), respectively.
been little integration in the literature. As Spector (1997) noted, Although the PA-NA typology has proven to be quite useful in
“Although many traits have been shown to correlate significantly investigating the dispositional source of job satisfaction, several
with job satisfaction, most research with personality has done little limitations exist. First, given the higher correlations of PA with job
more than demonstrate relations without offering much theoretical satisfaction, it is surprising that more research has been focused on
explanation” (p. 51). NA, in many cases to the exclusion of PA (e.g., Levin & Stokes,
One factor that has impeded theoretical explanations of the 1989; Necowitz & Roznowski, 1994). Second, the issue of the
dispositional source of job satisfaction is the lack of a framework independence of PA and NA continues to be debated in the
describing the structure and nature of personality. Thousands of literature (Russell & Carroll, 1999a, 1999b; D. Watson & Telle-
traits have been invented in the history of personality research, and gen, 1999). Some argue that it is inappropriate to treat PA and NA
scores of traits have been studied in relation to job satisfaction. As as separate concepts: that the traits represent opposite ends of
Arvey, Carter, and Buerkley (1991) commented, “There is confu- single bipolar construct or that a circumplex is required to take the
sion regarding which person variables should be examined. A relationships among the concepts into account (Carroll, Yik, Rus-
formidable array of person variables have been discussed as pos- sell, & Barrett, 1999). Others suggest that PA-NA may assess, at
least in part, current levels of happiness, affect experienced, or life
satisfaction (Judge & Locke, 1993). Finally, the PA-NA taxonomy
includes only two traits. Other traits may exist that are theoretically
Timothy A. Judge, Department of Management, University of Florida;
and empirically relevant to job satisfaction.
Daniel Heller, Department of Psychology, University of Iowa; Michael K.
Mount, Department of Management and Organizations, University of
Within the last 20 years, consensus has emerged that a five-
Iowa. factor model of personality, often termed the Big Five (Goldberg,
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Timothy 1990), can be used to describe the most salient aspects of person-
A. Judge, Department of Management, Warrington College of Business, ality. The five-factor structure has generalized across measures,
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611. E-mail: [email protected] cultures, and sources of ratings (McCrae & John, 1992). Although
530
PERSONALITY AND JOB SATISFACTION 531
the five-factor model has been researched in many areas of Agreeableness

industrial-organizational psychology, most notably with respect to
job performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991), the relationship of the McCrae and Costa (1991) argued that Agreeableness should be
five-factor model to job satisfaction is much less studied. A num- related to happiness because agreeable individuals have greater
ber of studies have investigated relations between an isolated facet motivation to achieve interpersonal intimacy, which should lead to
of the five-factor model (especially Neuroticism) and job satisfac- greater levels of well-being. Indeed, they found that Agreeableness
tion. However, there is a virtual dearth of research that has linked was positively related to life satisfaction, although at a relatively
the complete taxonomy to job satisfaction. Furthermore, unlike job low level (mean r ⫽ .16). Assuming these same communal moti-
performance, where more than a half-dozen meta-analyses have vations exist on the job, then the same process should operate with
been conducted using the Big Five framework, we are aware of no respect to job satisfaction. Organ and Lingl (1995) apparently
prior meta-analysis of the relationship of the Big Five traits to job agreed, commenting that Agreeableness “involves getting along
satisfaction. This is unfortunate because the five-factor model may with others in pleasant, satisfying relationships” (p. 340).
provide needed integration to this literature.
Conscientiousness
Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to investigate the

relationship between the five-factor model of personality and job

Organ and Lingl (1995) argued that Conscientiousness should
satisfaction. In conducting a meta-analysis of the relationship
be related to job satisfaction because it represents a general work-
between the Big Five traits and job satisfaction, we use the Barrick
involvement tendency and thus leads to a greater likelihood of
and Mount (1991) meta-analysis of the relationship of the Big Five
obtaining satisfying work rewards, both formal (e.g., pay, promo-
traits to job performance to guide our investigation. Before de-
tions) and informal (e.g., recognition, respect, feelings of personal
scribing the meta-analysis, we discuss potential linkages between
accomplishment). Indirectly, the subjective well-being literature
the Big Five traits and job satisfaction.
also suggests a positive relationship between Conscientiousness
and job satisfaction (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998).
Relationships of the Big Five Traits With Job Satisfaction
Neuroticism Moderators of the Personality–Job
Satisfaction Relationship
Because of their essentially negative nature, neurotic individuals
experience more negative life events than other individuals (Mag- Although there is good reason to believe that four of the Big
nus, Diener, Fujita, & Pavot, 1993) in part, because they select Five traits are related to job satisfaction across studies (the excep-
themselves into situations that foster negative affect (Emmons, tion being Openness), several possible moderators of the relation-
Diener, & Larsen, 1985). To the extent that such situations occur ship exist. First, because the personality–job satisfaction relation-
on or with respect to the job, they would lead to diminished levels ship might be stronger in cross-sectional studies, we investigated
of job satisfaction. Neuroticism has been described as the primary whether the relationship varied according to cross-sectional versus
source of NA, and the link between NA and job satisfaction was longitudinal research designs. Second, with few exceptions (e.g.,
documented in Connolly and Viswesvaran’s (2000) meta-analysis. Eysenck’s measures of Neuroticism and Extraversion; Eysenck &
Eysenck, 1968), there were no direct measures of the Big Five
Extraversion traits before the revision of the NEO Personality Inventory (Costa
& McCrae, 1992). Accordingly, we analyzed whether the
Whereas Neuroticism is related to the experience of negative personality–job satisfaction correlation varied depending on
life events, extraverts are predisposed to experience positive emo- whether a direct or indirect measure (using Barrick & Mount’s,
tions (Costa & McCrae, 1992), and positive emotionality likely 1991, coding scheme; see Method section) of the Big Five traits
generalizes to job satisfaction, as demonstrated by Connolly and was used. Finally, because the nature of job satisfaction measures
Viswesvaran’s (2000) meta-analysis of PA–job satisfaction rela- has been argued to affect their relationships with other variables
tionships. Evidence also indicates that extraverts have more friends (Brief & Roberson, 1989), on an exploratory basis, we also esti-
and spend more time in social situations than do introverts and, mated the magnitude of the personality–job satisfaction correlation
because of their social facility, are likely to find interpersonal by job satisfaction measure.
interactions (such as those that occur at work) more rewarding (D.
Watson & Clark, 1997). Method
Openness to Experience Rules for Inclusion in the Meta-Analysis
Openness to Experience is related to scientific and artistic To identify all possible studies of the relationship between the Big Five
creativity (Feist, 1998), divergent thinking, low religiosity, and traits and job satisfaction, we searched the PsycINFO database (1887–
political liberalism (see McCrae, 1996, for a review). None of 2000) for studies (articles, book chapters, dissertations, and unpublished
reports) that referenced personality and job satisfaction. In addition to
these psychological states seem to be closely related to job satis-
searching for keywords such as personality, Big Five, Agreeableness,
faction. Furthermore, DeNeve and Cooper (1998) noted that Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Neuroti-
“Openness to Experience is a ‘double-edged sword’ that predis- cism, we searched for a list of additional traits and measures that were
poses individuals to feel both the good and the bad more deeply” included in Barrick and Mount’s (1991) review. These efforts resulted in
(p. 199), rendering its directional influence on affective reactions the identification of 1,277 abstracts (including doctoral dissertations). Of
like subjective well-being or job satisfaction unclear. these 1,277 abstracts, 737 were obtained by searching for the keywords
532 JUDGE, HELLER, AND MOUNT
“personality and job satisfaction.” An additional 540 records were obtained specific facets of the job situation (as is the case with the Job Descriptive
by using names of personality inventories, common specific traits, and the Index; P. C. Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969), we computed an equally
Big Five traits in combination with job satisfaction. In reviewing these weighted composite of overall satisfaction using the Spearman-Brown
abstracts, we eliminated most because (a) they did not appear to measure prophecy formula (Hunter & Schmidt, 1990).
any discernible personality trait, (b) they assessed a trait that was not
classifiable in terms of the five-factor model, or (c) it was clear that they
did not report data (e.g., as was the case with most book chapters). We also Meta-Analytic Procedures
used several raw data sets that were available to the authors.
We used the meta-analytic procedures of Hunter and Schmidt (1990) to
For the remaining 430 journal articles and doctoral dissertations, we
correct observed correlations for sampling error and unreliability in mea-
examined each study to determine whether it contained the necessary
sures of personality and job satisfaction. Correlations were corrected indi-
information. Eighty-two articles and 53 doctoral dissertations met these
vidually. When authors of original studies reported an overall internal
criteria. Several studies contained multiple independent samples. Thus, in
consistency reliability for personality or job satisfaction, we used this value
all, 163 independent samples and 334 correlations were included in the to correct the observed correlation for attenuation. When reliabilities for
analyses. Several exclusionary rules were established. Reasons for exclud- personality or job satisfaction measures were not reported, we used the
ing studies at this level fell into several categories. First, many studies
mean reliability for job satisfaction or the relevant Big Five trait for those
failed to report the data necessary to obtain a correlation (e.g., studies that studies that did report a reliability estimate.3 Finally, three original studies
reported percentages or proportions or means with no standard deviations, used single-item measures of job satisfaction; consequently, no internal
studies that provided only a narrative summary of the results or reported consistency reliabilities were reported. In these cases, we used meta-
other measures of association that could not be converted to correlations; analytically derived estimates of the reliability of single-item measures of
e.g., analysis of variance results). Second, we excluded studies that in- job satisfaction (Wanous, Reichers, & Hudy, 1997). Hence, we assumed a
cluded traits that did not fall within Barrick and Mount’s (1991) classifi- reliability of .68 for single-item satisfaction scales.
cation of existing measures into the Big Five traits. Specifically, we In addition to reporting estimates of the mean true score correlations, it
excluded studies wherein the personality measure was a combination of is also important in meta-analysis to describe variability in the correlations.
more than one trait or could not clearly be identified as a personality trait Accordingly, we report 80% credibility intervals and 90% confidence
subsumed within the five-factor model. Thus, such traits as field depen- intervals around the estimated population correlations. Although some
dence, Machiavellianism, Type A, or typologies such as the Myers–Briggs meta-analyses report only confidence intervals (e.g., Ernst Kossek &
Type Indicator (MBTI) types were not included (studies that reported Ozeki, 1998) whereas others report only credibility intervals (e.g., Vinchur,
individual MBTI traits, e.g., I/E, rather than types, e.g., ISTP, were includ- Schippmann, Switzer, & Roth, 1998), it is important to report both because
ed). Similarly, traits such as hostility or impulsivity that have been treated each tells us different things about the nature of the correlations. Confi-
inconsistently by Big Five researchers also were excluded. dence intervals provide an estimate of the variability around the estimated
Personality measures were classified according to the coding procedure mean correlation; a 90% confidence interval excluding zero indicates that
developed and used by Barrick and Mount (1991). Specifically, in their we can be 95% confident that the average true correlation is nonzero (5%
meta-analysis, they classified personality measures based on an examina- of average correlations would lie beyond the upper limit of the distribu-
tion of the measures and decisions made by six expert judges (see pp. 8 –9 tion). Credibility intervals provide an estimate of the variability of indi-
of Barrick & Mount, 1991, for a detailed description of the classification vidual correlations across studies; an 80% credibility interval excluding
procedures). For example, the Dominance and Sociability scales from the zero indicates that 90% of the individual correlations in the meta-analysis
California Psychological Inventory (see Gough, 1988) were classified by excluded zero (for positive correlations, 10% are zero or less and 10% lie
the experts as measures of Extraversion, and the Warm and Suspicious at or beyond the upper bound of the interval). Thus, confidence intervals
(reverse-scored) scales from the 16 P-F were classified as measures of estimate variability in the mean correlation, whereas credibility intervals
Agreeableness. We followed their classification closely, with the following estimate variability in the individual correlations across the studies.
exceptions: (a) Obviously, direct measures of the Big Five traits, such as The moderators were determined by examining the articles and coding
those using the NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992) or the necessary information. For most of the moderators, this information
other direct measures of the Big Five traits, were included1; (b) two studies was easily obtained (e.g., longitudinal vs. cross-sectional design). In terms
using measures of dispositional optimism were included because research of measures, most articles reported the measure of personality and job
suggests such measures assess Neuroticism (T. W. Smith, Pope, Rhode- satisfaction. Thirty-eight percent of correlations involved a “direct” (ex-
walt, & Poulton, 1989); (c) four studies using measures of trait anxiety plicitly labeled) measure of the Big Five traits. This percentage varied
were included because, again, research indicates that these measures assess
Neuroticism (Zuckerman, Joireman, Kraft, & Kuhlman, 1999); (d) three
1
studies were included because the traits assessed appeared to closely Barrick and Mount (1991) included few direct measures of the Big
correspond to Openness: rigidity (rigid is an adjective descriptor of low Five traits because, at that time, few were available. The situation has
openness; Digman, 1989, p. 202), flexibility (measures of flexibility cor- changed appreciably since then, although still only a minority of the
relate significantly with Openness to Experience; Costa & McCrae, 1992, correlations in our study used direct measures of the Big Five traits.
2
p. 47), and adaptation-innovation (adaptive [Digman, 1989, p. 203] and Although some scholars have argued that PA and NA can be integrated
innovative [Goldberg, 1992, p. 35] are trait markers of Openness to into the five-factor model, such that PA is synonymous with Extraversion
Experience).2 and NA is synonymous with Neuroticism (Brief, 1998; D. Watson, 2000),
In terms of job satisfaction, consistent with the recommendations of we did not include PA and NA in our analysis for several reasons. First,
meta-analytic researchers (Matt & Cook, 1994), we defined the population although there is evidence supporting Brief’s and Watson’s assertions
to which we wished to generalize a priori as consisting of normal employed regarding PA and NA, direct tests are lacking. Second, because other
adults. Accordingly, satisfaction in primary studies needed to be measured reviews have discussed these variables extensively, we believe they war-
at the individual (as opposed to group) level, and satisfaction needed to rant separate consideration from the Big Five traits included here.
3
occur in a natural job setting. Thus, consistent with Barrick and Mount The mean reliability for measures of job satisfaction was .83. The mean
(1991), studies involving military or laboratory participants were excluded. reliabilities for measures of each of the Big Five traits were as follows:
Satisfaction needed to be assessed with global or overall measures (general Neuroticism ⫽ .82; Extraversion ⫽ .72; Openness to Experience ⫽ .67;
perceptions of one’s job). If satisfaction was measured with reference to Agreeableness ⫽ .66; Conscientiousness ⫽ .71.
Table 1
Meta-Analysis of the Relationship of Personality to Job Satisfaction
Average 80% CV 90% CI
Trait k N r ␳ SD␳ Lower Upper Lower Upper
Neuroticism 92 24,527 ⫺.24 ⫺.29 .16 ⫺.50 ⫺.08 ⫺.33 ⫺.26

Extraversion 75 20,184 .19 .25 .15 .06 .45 .22 .29
Openness to Experience 50 15,196 .01 .02 .21 ⫺.26 .29 ⫺.05 .08
Agreeableness 38 11,856 .13 .17 .16 ⫺.03 .37 .12 .22
Conscientiousness 79 21,719 .20 .26 .22 ⫺.02 .55 .21 .31
Note. k ⫽ number of correlations; N ⫽ combined sample size; ␳ ⫽ estimated true score correlation; SD␳ ⫽
standard deviation of true score correlation; CV ⫽ credibility interval; CI ⫽ confidence interval.
across the traits, from 52% direct measures for Extraversion to 20% direct procedure to determine whether it would yield a different result
measures for Conscientiousness. This is to be expected because no direct from N-weighted analyses. This alternative weighting procedure
measures of Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness existed be- did change some of the results, although not dramatically. The
fore the revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992),
results were as follows: Neuroticism, ␳ ⫽ ⫺.31; Extraversion, ␳ ⫽
which is why Barrick and Mount (1991) included only indirect measures in
their meta-analysis and why we followed their coding scheme. Measures of .25; Openness to Experience, ␳ ⫽ .02; Agreeableness, ␳ ⫽ .19;
job satisfaction were classified into the following categories: the Brayfield Conscientiousness, ␳ ⫽ .28. Thus, the Huffcutt et al. (1996)
and Rothe (1951) measure (17%), the Hoppock (1935) Job Satisfaction weighting procedure produced similar, although slightly higher,
Blank (8%), the Job Descriptive Index (P. C. Smith et al., 1969) (13%), correlations.
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, As Brief (1998) noted, it is important to investigate the dispo-
1967) (17%), other validated measures (21%), and ad hoc (previously
sitional correlates of job satisfaction in an integrated framework.
unvalidated) measures (24%).
Accordingly, we sought to determine the multivariate relationship
of the set of Big Five traits to job satisfaction. Using Hunter’s
Results
(1992) regression program, we regressed job satisfaction on the
Results of the meta-analyses relating the Big Five traits to job Big Five traits.4 To form the correlation matrix that served as input
satisfaction are provided in Table 1. Neuroticism (␳ ⫽ ⫺.29) was into the program, we used the meta-analytic estimates of the
the strongest correlate of job satisfaction, followed closely by relationship between the Big Five traits and job satisfaction in
Conscientiousness (␳ ⫽ .26) and Extraversion (␳ ⫽ .25). Both the Table 1 and Ones, Viswesvaran, and Reiss’s (1996) meta-analytic
confidence intervals and credibility intervals excluded zero for two estimate of the intercorrelations among the Big Five traits. The
traits: Neuroticism and Extraversion. For two other traits—Con- sample size we used for the regressions was equal to the average
scientiousness and Agreeableness—the confidence intervals ex- sample size of all studies in the analysis (Viswesvaran & Ones,
cluded zero, indicating that we can be confident that these average 1995): 280. Given that the N-weighted analysis produced results
correlations are distinguishable from zero. However, the 80% that were somewhat different from Huffcutt et al.’s (1996) weight-
credibility interval included zero for these traits, suggesting that ing procedure, we also estimated the regression using the meta-
the relationship of Conscientiousness and Agreeableness with job
analytic results produced from their weighting scheme.
satisfaction does not fully generalize across studies (e.g., in about
The regression results are provided in Table 2. As is shown,
10% of studies, the relationship between Conscientiousness and
regardless of which weighting method was used, three Big Five
job satisfaction was zero or negative). Finally, Openness to Expe-
traits—Extraversion, Conscientiousness, and Neuroticism—were
rience showed a weak correlation with job satisfaction (␳ ⫽ .02)
that was indistinguishable from zero. significant predictors of job satisfaction. Although these three
Although not reported in Table 1, results also revealed that traits were significant regardless of the method of weighting used
sampling error and other statistical artifacts explained only a small to estimate the correlations, the results were slightly stronger for
percentage of the variability in the correlations across studies. the analysis using Huffcutt et al.’s (1996) weighting procedure.
Across the five traits, only 16.1% of the variability in the corre- Perhaps the most meaningful statistic was the strong and signifi-
lations was explained by sampling error and other statistical arti- cant multiple correlation (R ⫽ .41 in the N-weighted analysis; R ⫽
facts (26.5% of the variability was explained using the alternative .43 in the analysis using the Huffcutt et al. weighting scheme)
weighting procedure described later). between the five-factor model and job satisfaction.
In the meta-analyses, the sample sizes varied dramatically,
from 5 to 2,900. As Huffcutt, Roth, and McDaniel (1996) noted, a
concern with weighting studies by the sample size (N weighting) in 4
The regression model implicitly assumes that the causal direction of
meta-analysis is that a handful of studies may dominate the anal- the personality–job satisfaction relationship is from personality to job
ysis. Accordingly, they developed an alternative weighting proce- satisfaction. Given that roughly 50% of the variance in the Big Five traits
dure that assigned a weight of 1 to a study with a the sample size is inherited (Jang, Livesley, & Vernon, 1996), and that any heritability in
was 75 or less, 2 if the sample size was between 75 and 200, and 3 job satisfaction is likely due to personality (Judge, 1992), this assumption
if the sample size was 200 or more. We used this weighting seems reasonable.
Table 2
Regression of Job Satisfaction on Big Five Personality Traits
N-weighted correlations Huffcutt et al. (1996) weighting
Trait ␤/R SE T ␤/R SE T
Neuroticism ⫺.20 .06 ⫺3.38* ⫺.21 .06 ⫺3.68*

Extraversion .21 .06 3.80* .21 .06 3.80*
Openness to Experience ⫺.04 .06 0.71 ⫺.04 .06 0.75
Agreeableness .04 .06 0.61 .05 .06 0.86
Conscientiousness .20 .06 3.40* .21 .06 3.67*
Multiple R .41 .06 7.70* .43 .06 8.27*
Note. ␤ ⫽ standardized regression coefficient; T ⫽ T value (␤/SE).

* p ⬍ .01.
Moderators of the Personality–Job Satisfaction Although the positive effects of Conscientiousness in terms of
Relationship job performance have been clearly demonstrated (Barrick &
Mount, 1991), the potential positive effects of conscientiousness in
The moderator results by job satisfaction measure are provided terms of job satisfaction have been virtually ignored in the litera-
in the Appendix. As is shown in the Appendix, across the traits, ture (see Organ & Lingl, 1995). Our results suggest that this is an
personality–job satisfaction correlations tended to be higher for oversight. Of the Big Five traits, Conscientiousness displayed the
several measures, most notably the Brayfield and Rothe (1951)
second strongest correlation with job satisfaction. However, it is
measure. It also is noteworthy that the personality–job satisfaction
important to note that the 80% credibility interval for Conscien-
correlations generally were not lower for ad hoc, or previously
tiousness (just) included zero. Of the 79 Conscientiousness corre-
unvalidated, measures of job satisfaction. Table 3 provides the
lations, 9 were negative, although it should be noted that 7 of
results of the two methodological moderators. Direct and indirect
these 9 correlations ranged from ⫺.12 to ⫺.02. Given this, and that
measures of personality did not differ much in their relation with
the average sample size for these nine correlations was relatively
job satisfaction; there was a slight tendency for job satisfaction to
small (median of 60), sampling error may explain these results.6
correlate more strongly with indirect measures (significant only in
the case of Conscientiousness). Similarly, and somewhat surpris- Furthermore, the average correlation for Conscientiousness was
ingly, personality–job satisfaction correlations did not differ much distinguishable from zero, as was the effect in the regression
by cross-sectional versus longitudinal research designs; only in the analyses.
case of Agreeableness was the difference significant.5 Finally, the other two traits—Agreeableness and Openness to
Experience— displayed relatively weak correlations with job sat-
isfaction. Although the mean Agreeableness correlation was non-
Discussion
zero, the correlations were highly variable across studies; more
Results of this meta-analytic review suggest that the five-factor than one of five Agreeableness correlations were negative, and a
model is a fruitful basis for examining the dispositional source of
job satisfaction. In particular, the traits of Neuroticism, Extraver-
5
sion, and Conscientiousness displayed moderate correlations with On an exploratory basis, we also investigated with the personality–job
job satisfaction. We are aware of no published primary studies satisfaction relations varied by the Holland (1985) occupational types. For
example, Conscientiousness may be related to job satisfaction most
focusing on the relationship of the five-factor model to job atti-
strongly in conventional and realistic occupations (those that are practical
tudes, much less a meta-analytic review of the relationship of the
and require orderliness and those that require conforming behavior, respec-
five-factor model to job satisfaction. Thus, these results fill an tively), Openness may be most related to satisfaction in investigative
important void in the literature. occupations (those requiring trouble shooting or creation of new knowl-
Neuroticism emerged as the strongest and most consistent cor- edge), and Agreeableness and Extraversion may be most related to satis-
relate of job satisfaction. It also is the Big Five trait that has been faction in social occupations. In coding occupations based on the primary
studied most often in relation to job satisfaction. The validity of occupational type in Holland’s (1985) RIASEC typology (only studies
Neuroticism came as no surprise to us. We also were not surprised based on a single occupation were coded), however, we found limited
that Extraversion displayed nonzero relationships with job satis- support for these expected relations. On the one hand, Conscientiousness
faction across studies. Emotional stability (low neuroticism) and was strongly related to job satisfaction in Realistic and Conventional jobs.
However, the other expected moderating effects were not supported, and
Extraversion are key aspects of the “happy personality” (DeNeve
some unexpected results were observed. One explanation for these findings
& Cooper, 1998); one would expect that the factors that cause
is that the primary RIASEC codes, at the study level, are too gross to fully
emotionally stable and extraverted individuals to be happy in life capture vocational type.
would also lead them to be happy in their jobs. As Tokar, Fischer, 6
One of the 16 (6.25%) correlations for studies using direct measures of
and Subich (1998) noted in their qualitative review, “Greater job conscientiousness was negative (and another was zero), whereas 8 of the 63
satisfaction is related to lower neuroticism and its variants, as well (12.7%) correlations based on indirect measures of conscientiousness were
as to higher extraversion and related traits” (p. 144). Our findings negative. If the .00 correlation noted previously had been ⫺.01, the
provide quantified support to this conclusion. proportions would be nearly the same (12.5% vs. 12.7%).
Table 3
Methodological Moderators of the Personality–Job Satisfaction Relationship
Measure of Big Five trait Research design
Trait Direct (D) Indirect (I) Cross-sectional (CS) Longitudinal (L)
Neuroticism ⫺.27 ⫺.31 ⫺.29 ⫺.32

Extraversion .24 .27 .26 .16
Openness to Experience .02 .01 .02 ⫺.09
Agreeableness .14 .21 .18L ⫺.23CS
Conscientiousness .17I .31D .27 .18
Note. Table entries are average correlation between Big Five traits and job satisfaction, corrected for
measurement error. Subscripts indicate significant differences in correlations. Across the cells, the number of
correlations ranged from k ⫽ 2 (n ⫽ 221) to k ⫽ 87 (n ⫽ 23,888).
roughly equal number were between .00 and .10. Openness to Although the results linking the Big Five traits to job satisfac-
Experience displayed a small and highly variable correlation with tion are impressive, other frameworks could explain the disposi-
job satisfaction. Indeed, 24 of the Openness to Experience corre- tional source of job satisfaction. For example, Connolly and
lations were negative and 26 were positive. Viswesvaran’s (2000) results indicate that PA and NA display
Given the obvious connections between job and life satisfaction moderately strong correlations with job satisfaction. Indeed, the
(Spector, 1997), it is worthwhile to compare our findings with correlations involving PA are stronger than those reported in this
DeNeve and Cooper’s (1998) meta-analytic findings regarding the study. However, two factors argue in favor of the five-factor
correlations between the Big Five traits and life satisfaction (see model. First, researchers have suggested that PA represents Extra-
their Table 7, p. 210). Accordingly, we took their findings and version and NA Neuroticism in the five-factor model, thus sub-
corrected them for measurement error.7 Results of this comparison suming PA and NA within the five-factor model (e.g., Brief, 1998;
are provided in Figure 1. As Figure 1, the results are quite similar. D. Watson & Clark, 1997). Because the five-factor model contains
Indeed, the rank-order correlation is perfect (Pearson r ⫽ .94). The an additional trait that is relevant to job satisfaction (Conscien-
only area of divergence is with respect to Openness to Experience tiousness) than does the PA-NA typology, it may be a more useful
which correlates more strongly with life satisfaction than job framework. At the very least, PA-NA would need to be supple-
satisfaction. It is unclear why this would be the case, although we mented with Conscientiousness if the maximum prediction of job
note that in DeNeve and Cooper’s meta-analysis, Openness to
satisfaction is to be obtained. Second, PA and NA are quasidispo-
Experience displayed a weaker correlation with happiness (aver-
sitional in that they are assessments of mood or “affective traits”
age uncorrected r ⫽ .06) compared with life satisfaction (average
(D. Watson, 2000, p. 15), are less stable than other dispositional
uncorrected r ⫽ .14). In general, however, the results are quite
measures (Judge & Bretz, 1993), and may to some degree be
similar, suggesting that the cognitive, affective, and behavioral
confounded with life satisfaction (Judge, Locke, Durham, &
factors that lead to personality–job satisfaction relations may be
Kluger, 1998). Nevertheless, given the empirical validity of both
similar to those that lead to personality–life satisfaction relations.
Given the strength of the relation between job and life satisfaction frameworks, and their similarity, future integrative research is
(Tait, Padgett, & Baldwin, 1989), the parallelism in the results needed.
makes sense. Another framework that may also explain the personological
The moderator analyses, especially those by measure of job basis of job satisfaction is Judge, Locke, and colleagues’ concept
satisfaction, did reveal variability in personality–job satisfaction of core self-evaluations. According to Judge and colleagues, core
correlations. However, most of the moderators did not follow
expectations or did not reveal significant differences. In general, 7
As noted earlier, DeNeve and Cooper (1998) did not correct their
the moderator results do not appear to undermine the validity in the meta-analytic results for unreliability. As Schmidt and Hunter (1996)
personality–satisfaction correlations across studies. One potential indicated, it is critical that estimates be corrected for unreliability if one is
moderator we were not able to explore is whether personality–job to avoid distortion in findings, meta-analytic or otherwise. Accordingly, as
satisfaction correlations varied by job satisfaction facet. Too few in our meta-analysis, we corrected DeNeve and Cooper’s meta-analytic
studies reported facet correlations to make such an analysis prac- estimates for unreliability in personality and life satisfaction. Reliability of
ticable here. Future research investigating personality–job satis- the Big Five traits was estimated using the results from a 2000 meta-
faction relations by facet might reveal interesting insights and analysis (Viswesvaran & Ones, 2000). The average internal consistencies
show that the traits display differential associations with job sat- of the Big Five traits in this meta-analysis were as follows: Neuroticism ⫽
isfaction facets. For example, following the principle of correspon- .78; Extraversion ⫽ .78; Openness ⫽ .73; Agreeableness ⫽ .75; Consci-
entiousness ⫽ .78. To arrive at a reliability for life satisfaction, we
dence (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977), it may be that traits narrower than
searched the PsycINFO literature for articles using what we believe to be
the Big Five better predict job satisfaction facets. Such an ap- the most widely used life satisfaction measure: the Satisfaction With Life
proach would comport with those who advocate a focus on traits Scale (Pavot & Diener, 1993). This search resulted in 32 correlations
more specific than the Big Five (e.g., Schneider & Hough, 1995) contained in 27 articles. The average internal consistency reliability,
and would provide a more complicated, but perhaps also more weighted by sample size, was .80. The studies used in this meta-analysis
complete, understanding of personality–satisfaction relations. are not listed in this article, but are available on request.
Figure 1. Comparison of validity of Big Five traits for job satisfaction and life satisfaction. (Life satisfaction
correlations are corrected for unreliability based on DeNeve and Cooper’s, 1998, uncorrected correlations: [see
Footnote 7 for explanation of corrections]. For ease of presentation, Neuroticism is labeled by its opposite pole,
Emotional Stability.) Open bars represent job satisfaction; solid bars represent life satisfaction.
self-evaluations is a broad personality trait that is manifested in (Magnus et al., 1993). Given the links between personality and job
self-esteem, locus of control, generalized self-efficacy, and (low) performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991) and personality and job
neuroticism. Judge et al. (1998) showed that these four traits satisfaction presented herein, perhaps the time has come for a
loaded on the same underlying construct and that the trait was a framework that takes the linkages among personality, job perfor-
significant predictor of job satisfaction, even controlling for PA mance, and job satisfaction into account. Such models may involve
and NA. At the same time, it is not clear how core self-evaluations more proximal predictors, such as integrity, which is related to the
fits into the five-factor framework. In Judge et al.’s (1998) frame- five-factor model (see Sackett & Wanek, 1996).
work, Neuroticism is subsumed within the core self-evaluation In summary, results of the current quantitative review indicate
framework. However, Neuroticism itself is a broad construct and that Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness display ap-
one of the most venerable in psychology. Thus, it is entirely preciable correlations with job satisfaction, and that the five-factor
possible that the core self-evaluations traits should be cumulated model is a fruitful basis to examine the dispositional source of job
together, as argued by Judge et al., but under the concept of satisfaction. In view of these results, future studies should attempt
Neuroticism rather than core self-evaluations. This is an issue for to integrate alternative frameworks of the dispositional source of
future research. job satisfaction and to model the psychological processes that may
Drawing from the tripartite (cognitive, affective, and behav- explain the relationships of the traits with job satisfaction.
ioral) categorization of attitudes (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993), the Big
Five traits may influence job satisfaction through each of these References
processes. Cognitively, these traits may influence how individuals
interpret characteristics of their jobs, as is the case when individ- References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the
uals with positive core self-evaluations interpret intrinsic job char- meta-analysis.
acteristics more positively, even controlling for actual job com- *Ahmad, S., & Razzack, B. (1983). A study of mental health and job
plexity (Judge, Bono, & Locke, 2000). Affectively, these traits satisfaction of industrial workers. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychol-
might influence job satisfaction through their effect on mood ogy, 10, 239 –244.
(Costa & McCrae, 1980) or mood at work (see Brief, 1998). Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical
Finally, behaviorally, employees who are emotionally stable, ex- analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84,
traverted, and conscientious may be happier at work because they 888 –918.
are more likely to achieve satisfying results at work. Part of this *Allison, N. L. (1984). The relationship between personality characteris-
tics and job satisfaction of selected computer programmers. Unpub-
effect may operate through job performance, such that conscien-
lished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri.
tious employees perform better and are more satisfied with their *Anand, S. P. (1977). School teachers: Job satisfaction vs. extraversion and
jobs because of the intrinsic and extrinsic rewards that high per- neuroticism. Indian Educational Review, 12, 68 –78.
formance provides. In part, it may operate through situation selec- Arvey, R. D., Bouchard, T. J., Segal, N. L., & Abraham, L. M. (1989). Job
tion, such that extraverted employees are more likely to spend time satisfaction: Environmental and genetic components. Journal of Applied
in situations that make people happy, such as in social interactions Psychology, 74, 187–192.
Arvey, R. D., Carter, G. W., & Buerkley, D. K. (1991). Job satisfaction: neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Jour-
Dispositional and situational influences. International Review of Indus- nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 668 – 678.
trial and Organizational Psychology, 6, 359 –383. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality
*Atteberry, M. G. (1977). The relationship between emotional stability and Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor (NEO-FFI) Inventory pro-
job satisfaction of elementary school principals. Unpublished doctoral fessional manual. Odessa, FL: PAR.
dissertation, Arizona State University. *Cottington, E. M. (1983). Occupational stress, psychosocial modifiers,
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimen- and blood pressure in a blue-collar occupation. Unpublished doctoral
sions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
1–26. *Day, D. V., Bedeian, A. G., & Conte, J. M. (1998). Personality as
*Beehr, T. A. (1975). Role ambiguity as a role stress: Some moderating predictor of work-related outcomes: Test of a mediated latent structural
and intervening variables. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 2068 –2088.
of Michigan. DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-
*Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2000). Responses to transformational analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psycholog-
leadership: Are some followers immune? Unpublished working paper, ical Bulletin, 124, 197–229.
University of Iowa. Digman, J. M. (1989). Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability,
*Bose, S., Roy, K. P., & Das Gupta, S. C. (1969). An attitude study of and utility. Journal of Personality, 57, 195–214.
multi-accident omnibus drivers. Indian Journal of Applied Psychol- *Dreher, G. F. (1980). Individual needs as correlates of satisfaction and
ogy, 6, 3–12. involvement with a modified Scanlon Plan company. Journal of Voca-
*Boswell, W. R. Boudreau, J. W., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Effects of tional Behavior, 17, 89 –94.
personality on executive career success in the United States and Europe. *Dwyer, D. J. (1990). The effect of dispositional influences on job percep-
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 53– 81. tions, work attitudes, and nonattendance behavior. Unpublished doc-
*Brayfield, A. H., & Marsh, M. M. (1957). Aptitudes, interests, and toral dissertation, University of Nebraska.
personality characteristics of farmers. Journal of Applied Psychol- Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Forth
ogy, 41, 98 –103. Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. *Elovainio, M., Kivimaeki, M., Steen, N., & Kalliomaeki-Levanto, T.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 35, 307–311. (2000). Organizational and individual factors affecting mental health and
Brief, A. P. (1998). Attitudes in and around organizations. Thousand Oaks, job satisfaction: A multilevel analysis of job control and personality.
CA: Sage. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 269 –277.
Brief, A. P., & Roberson, L. (1989). Job attitude organization: An explor- Emmons, R. A., Diener, E., & Larsen, R. J. (1985). Choice of situations
atory study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 717–727. and congruence models of interactionism. Personality and Individual
*Bristow, C. L. (1985). Achievement motivation, job characteristics, and Differences, 6, 693–702.
job satisfaction: An exploratory study. Unpublished doctoral disserta- Ernst Kossek, E., & Ozeki, C. (1998). Work-family conflict, policies, and
tion, University of Iowa. the job-life satisfaction relationship: A review and directions for orga-
*Burroughs, S. M., & Eby, L. T. (1998). Psychological sense of commu- nizational behavior-human resources research. Journal of Applied Psy-
nity at work: A measurement system and explanatory framework. Jour- chology, 83, 139 –149.
nal of Community Psychology, 26, 509 –532. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1968). Manual for the Eysenck
*Callahan, S. D., & Kidd, A. H. (1986). Relationship between job satis- Personality Inventory. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Test-
faction and self-esteem in women. Psychological Reports, 59, 663– 668. ing Service.
*Calvi, C. J. (1993). Career implications of personal styles for job roles Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic
and functions and job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2, 290 –309.
University of Missouri. *Fellers, R. B. (1974). Relationships between career satisfaction and
*Capin, P. H. (1986). The effects of personality and type of job on personality type for employed dieticians. Unpublished doctoral disser-
satisfaction with work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of tation, University of Florida.
Louisville. Fisher, V. E., & Hanna, J. V. (1931). The dissatisfied worker. New York:
Carroll, J. M., Yik, M. S. M., Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (1999). On the Macmillan.
psychometric principles of affect. Review of General Psychology, 3, *Fox, S., & Spector, P. E. (1999). A model of work frustration-aggression.
14 –22. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 915–931.
*Cartwright, L. K. (1978). Career satisfaction and role harmony in a *Francis, L. J., & Robbins, M. (1999). The relationship between person-
sample of young women physicians. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 12, ality and satisfaction/dissatisfaction with ministry among female stipen-
184 –196. diary Anglican clergy in the UK. Pastoral Psychology, 47, 439 – 444.
*Chusmir, L. H. (1981). Sex differences in the motivation of managers: A *Furnham, A., & Zacherl, M. (1986). Personality and job satisfaction.
look at need achievement, need affiliation, and need power. Unpublished Personality and Individual Differences, 7, 453– 459.
doctoral dissertation, University of Miami. *Garskof, M. S. (1985). Motivating teachers with nonfinancial incentives:
*Chusmir, L. H., & Hood, J. A. (1986). Relationship between Type A The relationships of compensatory-time jobs and the need to achieve to
behavior pattern and motivational needs. Psychological Reports, 58, the job satisfaction of high school teachers in New York City. Unpub-
783–794. lished doctoral dissertation, New York University.
*Coddington, T. M. (1999). The role of expectations, personality, and *Gilleland, R. L. (1974). The relationship between the WAIS and MMPI
spirituality in the tenure of Catholic campus ministers: A three year subscale scores and work adjustment outcomes in adult blind and
study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas. partially sighted persons. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State
Connolly, J. J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2000). The role of affectivity in job University.
satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differ- Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The
ences, 29, 265–281. Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and ogy, 59, 1216 –1229.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five Jang, K. L., Livesley, W. J., & Vernon, P. A. (1996). Heritability of the Big
factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26 – 42. Five personality dimensions and their facets: A twin study. Journal of
*Gorini, H. M. (1991). An individual’s correspondence preference as Personality, 64, 577–591.
related to work-related complaints, neuroticism, and job satisfaction. *Janman, K., Jones, J. G., Payne, R. L., & Rick, J. T. (1988). Clustering
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois. individuals as a way of dealing with multiple predictors in occupational
Gough, H. G. (1988). Manual for the California Psychological Inventory. stress research. Behavioral Medicine, 14, 17–29.
Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. *Janssen, O., de Vries, T., & Cozijnsen, A. J. (1998). Voicing by adapting
*Grise, J. (1973). Interactional aspects of workers’ achievement needs with and innovating employees: An empirical study on how personality and
trait anxiety levels and their relationships to job complexity, job tension, environment interact to affect voice behavior. Human Relations, 51,
job performance, job satisfaction and workers’ potential. Unpublished 945–967.
doctoral dissertation, University of Western Ontario. *Jenkins, S. R. (1987). Need for achievement and women’s careers over 14
*Gross, R. H. (1978). Moderators of the job performance-job satisfaction years: Evidence for occupational structure effects. Journal of Personal-
relationship for research scientists. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, ity and Social Psychology, 53, 922–932.
University of Tennessee. *Jex, S. M., Spector, P. E., Gudanowski, D. M., & Newman, R. A. (1991).
*Guerrieri, S. I. (1980). Teacher personality characteristics in selected
Relations between exercise and employee responses to work stressors: A

open and non-open elementary schools. Unpublished doctoral disserta- summary of two studies. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6,
tion, University of Arizona. 425– 443.
*Guha, T. N. (1965). Personality factors and job satisfaction among shoe *Joyce, W. F., Slocum, J. W., & von Glinow, M. A. (1982). Person ⫻
factory workers. Indian Psychological Review, 2, 59 – 64. Situation interaction: Competing models of fit. Journal of Occupational
*Harbin, J. L. (1980). Managerial motivation: Some correlates of job Behaviour, 3, 265–280.
performance and job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Judge, T. A. (1992). The dispositional perspective in human resources
University of Arkansas. research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Manage-
*Hart, A. L. (1989). Operating room nurses’ personality profiles as re- ment, 10, 31–72.
lated to job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana *Judge, T. A., & Bauer, T. N. (1997). Five-factor model of personality and
University. employee attitudes. Unpublished manuscript.
*Hart, P. M. (1999). Predicting employee life satisfaction: A coherent
*Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (1999). Job attitudes of employees at Hawkeye
model of personality, work, and nonwork experiences, and domain
Foodsystems. Unpublished technical report, University of Iowa.
satisfactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 564 –584.
*Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., & Locke, E. A. (2000). Personality and job
*Hartley, M. P. (1975). The relationship of locus of control and need
satisfaction: The mediating role of job characteristics. Journal of Applied
achievement to job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rut-
Psychology, 85, 237–249.
gers University.
Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. (1993). Report on an alternative measure of
*Heron, A. (1955). Personality and occupational adjustment: A cross-
affective disposition. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53,
validation study. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 9, 15–20.
1095–1104.
*Higashi, C. J. (1987). A correlational study of the characteristic values
*Judge, T. A., Bretz, R. D., Jr., Kennedy, D. J., & Bloom, M. C. (1996).
and needs with work related factors among registered nurses. Unpub-
People as sculptors versus sculpture: Test of a dispositional model of
lished doctoral dissertation, University of the Pacific.
career success. Unpublished manuscript.
*Hodapp, V., Neuser, K. W., & Weyer, G. (1988). Job stress, emotion, and
*Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999).
work environment: Toward a causal model. Personality and Individual
The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career suc-
Differences, 9, 851– 859.
Holland, J. L. (1985). The self-directed search: Professional manual. cess across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52, 621– 652.
Odessa, FL: PAR. Judge, T. A., & Locke, E. A. (1993). Effect of dysfunctional thought
*Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. New York: Harper. processes on subjective well-being and job satisfaction. Journal of
House, R. J., Shane, S. A., & Herold, D. M. (1996). Rumors of the death Applied Psychology, 78, 475– 490.
of dispositional research are vastly exaggerated. Academy of Manage- *Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C., & Kluger, A. N. (1998).
ment Review, 21, 203–224. Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core
Huffcutt, A. I., Roth, P. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (1996). A meta-analytic evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 17–34.
investigation of cognitive ability in employment interview evaluations: *Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Pucik, V., & Welbourne, T. M. (1999).
Moderating characteristics and implications for incremental validity. Managerial coping with organizational change: A dispositional perspec-
Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 459 – 473. tive. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 107–122.
Hunter, J. E. (1992). REGRESS: A multiple regression program in *Jyothi, P. (1983). A study of achievement motivation in relation to job
BASICA. User’s manual, Department of Psychology, Michigan State satisfaction among high and low achieving working women. Managerial
University. Psychology, 4, 84 –93.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Newbury *Keene, D. L. (1983). Personality factors related to career choice and job
Park, CA: Sage. satisfaction among female elementary and secondary teacher education
*Ilies, R., & Judge, T. A. (in press). Understanding the dynamic relation- alumni. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas.
ship between personality, mood, and job satisfaction: A field experience *Kemmerer, B. E. (1991). The moderating effect of personality differences
sampling study. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision on job stress: A longitudinal investigation. Unpublished doctoral disser-
Processes. tation, University of Nebraska.
*Indiresan, J. (1975). Multivariate analysis of factors affecting the job *Kennedy, D. J. (1999). On the road again: An investigation of the
satisfaction of engineering teachers. Indian Journal of Psychometry and situational and intentional antecedents of job relocation decisions in the
Education, 6, 16 –27. service sector. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University.
*James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. (1980). Perceived job characteristics and job *Khoury, R. M., & Khoury, D. C. (1981). Professionalization of police: A
satisfaction: An examination of reciprocal causation. Personnel Psychol- question of altruism. Psychological Reports, 49, 896 – 898.
ogy, 33, 97–135. *Kirkcaldy, B., Thome, E., & Thomas, W. (1989). Job satisfaction amongst
psychosocial workers. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 191– relation to their personality, values and self-esteem. Journal of Person-
196. ality and Clinical Studies, 4, 63– 68.
*Lair, A. J. (1986). Kansas special education administrators: Personality *Molitor, D. D. (1998). An examination of the effects of personality and job
factors and demographics as indicators of job satisfaction. Unpublished satisfaction on multiple non-workrole organizational behaviors. Unpub-
doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University. lished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University.
*Landsbergis, P. A., Schnall, P. L., Deitz, D., Friedman, R., & Pickering, *Monsour, D. K. (1987). Student teacher effectiveness and job satisfaction:
T. (1992). The patterning of psychological attributes and distress by “job An analysis of personality and cognitive variables in relation to perfor-
strain” and social support in a sample of working men. Journal of mance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
Behavioral Medicine, 15, 379 – 403. *Mount, M. K., Harter, J. K., Barrick, M. R., & Colbert, A. (2000, August).
*Larocque, E. R. (1976). A comparison of need strength, need satisfaction, Does job satisfaction moderate the relationship between conscientious-
and personality factors as they relate to job satisfaction in selected ness and job performance? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
occupational levels. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State Academy of Management, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University. *Moyle, P., & Parkes, K. (1999). The effects of transition stress: A
*LaRussa, G. W. (1981). A personality study predicting the effectiveness relocation study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 625– 646.
and satisfaction of Catholic priests in pastoral ministry. Unpublished *Muthayya, B. C., & Gnanakannan, I. (1973). Developmental personnel: A
doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. psycho-social study across three states in India. Hyderabad, India:
Levin, I., & Stokes, J. P. (1989). Dispositional approach to job satisfaction: National Institute of Community Development.
Role of negative affectivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 752– *Nagarathnamma, B. (1988). Job satisfaction as a function of locus of
758. control and neuroticism. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied
*Little, W. G. (1972). Relationships between certain personality charac- Psychology, 14, 12–15.
teristics of post-secondary distributive education personnel and job Necowitz, L. B., & Roznowski, M. (1994): Negative affectivity and job
satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota. satisfaction: Cognitive processes underlying the relationship and effects
*Long, B. C. (1993). Coping strategies of male managers: A prospective on employee behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 270 –294.
analysis of predictors of psychosomatic symptoms and job satisfaction. *Nelson, A., Cooper, C. L., & Jackson, P. R. (1995). Uncertainty amidst
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 184 –199. change: The impact of privatization on employee job satisfaction and
*Lucas, R. T. (1991). Personality and situational differences between well-being. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychol-
more- and less-satisfied ministers in the American Baptist Churches of ogy, 68, 57–71.
Indiana, and those who have left pastoral ministry. Unpublished doc- *Newsome, E. T. (1976). A study of relationships between job satisfaction
toral dissertation, Indiana University. and personality needs of college student volunteers at Indiana State
*Lusch, R. F., & Serpkenci, R. R. (1990). Personal differences, job tension, University. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana State University.
job outcomes, and store performance: A study of retail store managers. *Nonis, S. A. (1992). Factors associated with salespersons’ use of influ-
Journal of Marketing, 54, 85–101. ence tactics and their outcomes: An exploratory study. Unpublished
Magnus, K., Diener, E., Fujita, F., & Pavot, W. (1993). Extraversion and doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas.
neuroticism as predictors of objective life events: A longitudinal anal- *Olson, H., Jr. (1967). Relationships between certain personality charac-
ysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1046 –1053. teristics of distributive education teacher-coordinators and job satisfac-
*Manlove, E. E. (1993). Multiple predictors of burnout in child care tion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
workers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Reiss, A. D. (1996). Role of social
University. desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red her-
*Mannheim, B., Baruch, Y., & Tal, J. (1997). Alternative models for ring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 660 – 679.
antecedents and outcomes of work centrality and job satisfaction of Organ, D. W., & Lingl, A. (1995). Personality, satisfaction, and organiza-
high-tech personnel. Human Relations, 50, 1537–1562. tional citizenship behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 339 –350.
Matt, G. E., & Cook, T. D. (1994). Threats to the validity of research *Orpen, C. (1985). The effects of need for achievement and need for
syntheses. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of independence on the relationship between perceived job attributes and
research synthesis (pp. 503–520). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. managerial satisfaction and performance. International Journal of Psy-
*Mauldin, P. B. (1973). Selected personality characteristics and job sat- chology, 20, 207–219.
isfaction in experienced elementary and secondary teachers. Unpub- *Pandey, A. K., & Prakash, P. (1984). A study on relationship between
lished doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama. achievement motivation and satisfaction of industrial employees. Indian
McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness. Psychologist, 3, 104 –110.
Psychological Bulletin, 120, 323–337. *Parasuraman, S., & Alutto, J. A. (1984). Sources and outcomes of stress
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1991). Adding liebe und arbeit: The full in organizational settings: Toward the development of a structural
five-factor model and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology model. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 330 –350.
Bulletin, 17, 227–232. *Parker, B., & Chusmir, L. H. (1991). Motivation needs and their rela-
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor tionship to life success. Human Relations, 44, 1301–1312.
model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 2, 175–215. *Parker, L. J. (1993). The relationship between personality factors and job
*Medcof, J. W., & Wegener, J. G. (1992). Work technology and the needs satisfaction in public school band directors. Unpublished doctoral dis-
for achievement and nurturance among nurses. Journal of Organiza- sertation, University of Kansas.
tional Behavior, 13, 413– 423. *Pavia, E. S. (1985). Differences between new and established industrial
*Melamed, S., Meir, E. I., & Samson, A. (1995). The benefits of workers: An interactional model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
personality-leisure congruence: Evidence and implications. Journal of Texas Christian University.
Leisure Research, 27, 25– 40. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction With Life
*Miller, R. L., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M. (1999). Personality and Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164 –172.
organizational health: The role of conscientiousness. Work & Stress, 13, *Perone, M., DeWaard, R. J., & Baron, A. (1979). Satisfaction with real
7–19. and simulated jobs in relation to personality variables and drug use.
*Mohan, J., & Bali, S. (1988). A study of job-satisfaction of doctors in Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 660 – 668.
*Peterson, M. F. (1983). Co-workers and hospital staff’s work attitudes: Smith, T. W., Pope, M. K., Rhodewalt, F., & Poulton, J. L. (1989).
Individual difference moderators. Nursing Research, 32, 115–121. Optimism, neuroticism, coping, and symptom reports: An alternative
*Pinder, C. C. (1977). Multiple predictors of post-transfer satisfaction: The interpretation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of Personality and
role of urban factors. Personnel Psychology, 30, 543–556. Social Psychology, 56, 640 – 648.
*Porwal, N. K. (1987). A comparative study of the personality of the job *Sondhi, M., & Bhardwaj, G. (1987). The psychology of hierarchy: A
satisfied and the job dissatisfied teachers as measured by factors A, C, E, macro level analysis in large scale paper industry. Indian Psychological
H, L, and Q4 of 16-PF. Asian Journal of Psychology & Education, 19, Review, 32, 1–9.
27–31. *Soyer, R. B., Rovenpor, J. L., & Kopelman, R. E. (1999). Narcissism and
*Porwal, N. K., & Sharma, S. C. (1985). Job satisfaction and emotional achievement motivation as related to three facets of the sales role:
stability. Indian Psychological Review, 28, 1– 4. Attraction, satisfaction and performance. Journal of Business & Psy-
*Richard, L. R. (1994). Psychological type and job satisfaction among chology, 14, 285–304.
practicing lawyers in the United States. Unpublished doctoral disserta- Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
tion, Temple University. *Srivastava, S. K. (1985). A comparative study of job satisfaction among
*Roberts, S. W. (1987). The effects of anxiety and selected personality private and public sector employees with special reference to achieve-
characteristics on job satisfaction among Utah paramedics. Unpub-
ment motivation. Indian Journal of Applied Psychology, 22, 10 –15.

lished doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University. *Srivastava, S. K. (1986). To measure the level of job satisfaction in
*Romero, J. D. (1975). Personality factors and job satisfaction among technical and non-technical employees with special reference to differ-
rural health care employees. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer- ent personality characteristics in public sectors. Indian Journal of Ap-
sity of New Mexico. plied Psychology, 23, 1–5.
*Runco, M. A. (1995). The creativity and job satisfaction of artists in Staw, B. M., Bell, N. E., & Clausen, J. A. (1986). The dispositional
organizations. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 13, 39 – 45. approach to job attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. Administrative
Russell, J. A., & Carroll, J. M. (1999a). On the bipolarity of positive and Science Quarterly, 31, 56 –77.
negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 3–30. Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1985). Stability in the midst of change: A
Russell, J. A., & Carroll, J. M. (1999b). The phoenix of bipolarity: Reply dispositional approach to job attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychol-
to Watson and Tellegen (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125, 611– 617. ogy, 70, 469 – 480.
Sackett, P. R., & Wanek, J. E. (1996). New developments in the use of
*Steers, R. M. (1975). Effects of need for achievement on the job perfor-
measures of honesty, integrity, conscientiousness, dependability, trust-
mance-job attitude relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60,
worthiness, and reliability for personnel selection. Personnel Psychol-
678 – 682.
ogy, 49, 787– 829.
*Stein, J. A., Smith, G. M., Guy, S. M., & Bentler, P. M. (1993).
*Schaubroeck, J., Ganster, D. C., & Kemmerer, B. (1996). Does trait affect
Consequences of adolescent drug use on young adult job behavior and
promote job attitude stability? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17,
job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 463– 474.
191–196.
*Sterns, L., Alexander, R. A., Barrett, G. V., & Dambrot, F. H. (1983). The
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1996). Measurement error in psychological
relationship of extraversion and neuroticism with job preferences and
research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1,
job satisfaction for clerical employees. Journal of Occupational Psy-
199 –223.
chology, 56, 145–153.
Schneider, R. J., & Hough, L. M. (1995). Personality and industrial/
*Stone, E. F., Mowday, R. T., & Porter, L. W. (1977). Higher order need
organizational psychology. International Review of Industrial and Or-
strengths as moderators of the job scope-job satisfaction relationship.
ganizational Psychology, 10, 77–129.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 466 – 471.
*Schwartz, G. R. (1984). Determinants of job satisfaction for exempt and
non-exempt employees. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois Insti- *Struempfer, D. J. W. (1997). The relation between religious motivation
tute of Technology. and work-related variables amongst agricultural workers. South African
*Sharma, S., & Moudgil, A. C. (1986). Job satisfaction vs. n-achievement. Journal of Psychology, 27, 134 –142.
Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 13, 203–208. Tait, M., Padgett, M. Y., & Baldwin, T. T. (1989). Job and life satisfaction:
*Sheinfeld, D. Z. (1983). Civil liberties climate in work organizations and A reevaluation of the strength of the relationship and gender effects as
its relationship with job and work attitudes. Unpublished doctoral dis- a function of the date of the study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74,
sertation, Stevens Institute of Technology. 502–507.
*Shrivastava, G. P. (1978). A study of some determinants of job satisfac- *Takahashi, K. (1999). [Job satisfaction of medical sales representatives in
tion among underground and ground colliery workers. Indian Journal of Japan]. Unpublished raw data.
Industrial Relations, 14, 131–140. *Tang, T. L. P., & Ibrahim, A. H. S. (1998). Antecedents of organizational
*Slocum, J. W., Miller, J. D., & Misshank, M. J. (1970). Needs, environ- citizenship behavior revisited: Public personnel in the United States and
mental work satisfaction and job performance. Training and Develop- in the Middle East. Public Personnel Management, 27, 529 –550.
ment Journal, 24, 12–15. *Tejagupta, Y. (1987). The relationship between early childhood teacher
*Smith, C. A. (1983). Job satisfaction, workplace environment, and per- personality and job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illi-
sonality traits as sources of influence on helping behaviors: A social nois State University.
exchange perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana *Terry, D. J., Neilsen, M., & Perchard, L. (1993). Effects of work stress on
University. psychological well-being and job satisfaction: The stress-buffering role
*Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citi- of social support. Australian Journal of Psychology, 45, 168 –175.
zenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psy- *Thoresen, C. J. (2000). Antecedents and consequences of coping with
chology, 68, 653– 663. setbacks at work: A theory-driven framework. Unpublished doctoral
Smith, P. C. (1955). The prediction of individual differences in suscepti- dissertation, University of Iowa.
bility to industrial monotony. Journal of Applied Psychology, 39, 322– Tokar, D. M., Fischer, A. R., & Subich, L. M. (1998). Personality and
329. vocational behavior: A selected review of the literature, 1993–1997.
Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of Journal of Vocational Behavior, 53, 115–153.
satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally. *Tokar, D. M., & Subich, L. M. (1997). Relative contributions of congru-
ence and personality dimensions to job satisfaction. Journal of Voca- Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1999). Issues in dimensional structure of
tional Behavior, 50, 482– 491. affect—Effects of descriptors, measurement error, and response formats:
*Tregaskis, W. F. (1987). Job satisfaction and health. Unpublished doc- Comment on Russell and Carroll (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125,
toral dissertation, Ball State University. 601– 610.
Vinchur, A. J., Schippmann, J. S., Switzer, F. S. III, & Roth, P. L. (1998). *Watson, G. T. (1976). The relationship of selected personal characteris-
A meta-analytic review of predictors of job performance for salespeople. tics of counselors to job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 586 –597. Texas A&M University.
Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1995). Theory testing: Combining psy- *Weiss, D. J. (1968). A study of the relationship of participation in
chometric meta-analysis and structural equations modeling. Personnel decision-making selected personality variables and job satisfaction of
Psychology, 48, 865– 885. the educational research and development council elementary school
Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Measurement error in “Big Five principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
factors” personality assessment: Reliability generalization across studies Weiss, D. J. Dawis, R. V. England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967).
and measures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 224 – Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis:
Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota.
235.
Weitz, J. (1952). A neglected concept in the study of job satisfaction.
*Wallace-Barnhill, G. L. (1982). Comparison of intensive care unit nurses,

Personnel Psychology, 5, 201–205.
non-intensive care unit nurses and non-nursing personnel with regard to

*Wong, C., Tam, K., Fung, M., & Wan, K. (1993). Differences between
personality variables and job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral disser-
odd and even number of response scale: Some empirical evidence.
tation, University of Maryland.
Chinese Journal of Psychology, 35, 75– 86.
*Wanberg, C. R., Carmichael, H. D., & Downey, R. G. (1999). Satisfaction
*Woodworth, D. G. (1964). Job-satisfaction and personality: A study of
at last job and unemployment: A new look. Journal of Organizational research scientists. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Behavior, 20, 121–131. California, Berkeley.
Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job *Yasin, M. M. (1996). Entrepreneurial effectiveness and achievement in
satisfaction: How good are single-item measures? Journal of Applied Arab culture: New evidence to rekindle interest in an old predictor.
Psychology, 82, 247–252. Journal of Business Research, 35, 69 –77.
Watson, D. (2000). Mood and temperament. New York: Guilford Press. *Yasin, M. M. (1987). Assessing managerial, technical, and academic
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional motivation in the Arab culture: The relationships of needs for achieve-
core. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. R. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of ment, affiliation and power with effectiveness. Unpublished doctoral
personality psychology (pp. 767–793). San Diego: Academic Press. dissertation, Clemson University.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and Zuckerman, M., Joireman, J., Kraft, M., & Kuhlman, D. M. (1999).
validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The Where do motivational and emotional traits fit within three factor
PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, models of personality? Personality and Individual Differences, 26,
1063–1070. 487–504.
Appendix
Personality–Job Satisfaction Correlations by Measure of Job Satisfaction

Minnesota Other
Brayfield & Hoppock Job Satisfaction previously Ad hoc
Rothe measure Satisfaction Job Descriptive Questionnaire validated measure
Big Five trait (1) Blank (2) Index (3) (4) (5) (6)
Neuroticism ⫺.364,5 ⫺.56 ⫺.30 ⫺.261 ⫺.261 ⫺.30

Extraversion .374,5,6 .33 .24 .231 .211 .251
Openness to Experience ⫺.01 .02 .06 .135 ⫺.014 .02
Agreeableness .312,5,6 .131 .22 .19 .151 ⫺.021
Conscientiousness .383,5,6 .45 .201 .30 .191 .231
Note. Table entries are meta-analytic estimates of the average true score correlation (␳) between Big Five traits and job satisfaction, corrected for
measurement error. Subscripts indicate significant differences in correlations. Across the cells, the number of correlations ranged from k ⫽ 4 (n ⫽ 441)
to k ⫽ 26 (n ⫽ 4,959).
Received November 14, 2000

Revision received September 25, 2001
Accepted September 28, 2001 䡲

Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Applied Psychology Copyright 2002 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.

2002, Vol. 87, No. 3, 530 –541 0021-9010/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.3.530

Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis

Timothy A. Judge Daniel Heller and Michael K. Mount

the five-factor model has been researched in many areas of Agreeableness

Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to investigate the

relationship between the five-factor model of personality and job

Average 80% CV 90% CI

Trait k N r ␳ SD␳ Lower Upper Lower Upper

Neuroticism 92 24,527 ⫺.24 ⫺.29 .16 ⫺.50 ⫺.08 ⫺.33 ⫺.26

N-weighted correlations Huffcutt et al. (1996) weighting

Trait ␤/R SE T ␤/R SE T

Neuroticism ⫺.20 .06 ⫺3.38* ⫺.21 .06 ⫺3.68*

Note. ␤ ⫽ standardized regression coefficient; T ⫽ T value (␤/SE).

Measure of Big Five trait Research design

Trait Direct (D) Indirect (I) Cross-sectional (CS) Longitudinal (L)

Neuroticism ⫺.27 ⫺.31 ⫺.29 ⫺.32

Relations between exercise and employee responses to work stressors: A

ment motivation. Indian Journal of Applied Psychology, 22, 10 –15.

*Wallace-Barnhill, G. L. (1982). Comparison of intensive care unit nurses,

non-intensive care unit nurses and non-nursing personnel with regard to

Personality–Job Satisfaction Correlations by Measure of Job Satisfaction

Neuroticism ⫺.364,5 ⫺.56 ⫺.30 ⫺.261 ⫺.261 ⫺.30

Received November 14, 2000

You might also like