Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
0021-9010/85/$00.75
Barry M. Staw
University of California, Berkeley
469
470
Dispositional Approach
The dispositional approach involves the
measurement of personal characteristics and
the assumption that such measures can aid
in explaining individual attitudes and behavior. Although distinctions are sometimes made
between the concepts of personal dispositions,
traits, personality, and individual characteristics, these terms are used almost interchangeably in the literature. Each of these
terms is based on a set of common assumptions: that it is possible to characterize people
on certain dimensions, that these dimensions
have some stability over time, and that these
dimensions are useful in predicting individual
behavior across situations.
Dispositional concepts have been criticized
on many grounds, but the most telling has
been MischeFs (1968) argument that personality scales or traits have accounted for little
variance in human action across situations.
Recently, however, several counterarguments
have been made in defense of personality
determinants of behavior. Bern and Allen
(1974) have noted that the behavior of some
STABILITY OF JOB
ATTITUDES
471
472
473
less sophisticated than, for example, the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Weiss et al., 1967) or the Michigan
measure of facet satisfaction (Quinn & Slaincs, 1979).
However, the chief advantage of using the National
Longitudinal Survey is its documentation of changes in
the job situation. The National Longitudinal Survey
documents objective changes in employer, occupation,
job status and pay, whereas most surveys rely primarily
on perceptions of the job situation (e.g., job challenge)
that may be confounded with job attitudes.
Job Attitudes
Job attitudes were assessed by a one-item global satisfaction measure with four levels of possible response
(ranging from highly satisfied to highly dissatisfied). This
attitudinal measure violates Block's (1977) argument for
reliable, multimethod measurement of individual dispositions and will no doubt attenuate tests for consistency.
Also, in light of Weiss and Adler's (1984) recommendations for research designed around personality constructs,
it should be noted that the assessment of job attitudes
was a minor aspect of the Longitudinal Survey. The
Survey contained multiple and sophisticated measures of
labor market behavior but did not focus greatly on
attitudinal issues. Because of these methodological shortcomings, this study's assessments of attitudinal consistency
are likely to comprise very conservative tests of the
dispositional approach. Greater consistency would no
doubt be found in longitudinal research devoted primarily
to individual attitudes and emotional responses.
Situational Variables
To test for attitudinal consistency across situations,
changes in the situation need to be documented in a way
that is independent of the measurement of satisfaction.
Situational theories of both job design and social information processing would argue that there are many
potential sources of environmental influence on an individual's attitudes. Therefore, a strong test of the dispositional approach would be to examine attitudinal consistency when people have made large-scale changes in their
work lives. One major change would be to switch employers, moving to an entirely new organization. Rather
than simply changing a small proportion of the job
content (as in field experiments in which a few aspects
of the job are altered), a change of employer usually
brings a new supervisor, different physical surroundings,
and an altered set of working procedures. Another sweeping change in the work situation would likely come from
the individual changing his or her occupation. Although
a change in employer might involve many situational
changes, it could be argued that the nature of the work
task might remain stable across organizations. In contrast,
a change in occupation would usually involve an entirely
different set of work tasks. Thus, a very conservative test
of the dispositional perspective would examine attitudinal
consistency across changes in both employer and occupation.
The National Longitudinal Survey documented changes
in both employer and occupation. Those working in the
same occupation and for the same employer were assumed
to have undergone the least situational change. Respon-
Results
Table 1 shows the intercorrelation of the
satisfaction measures from 1966, 1969, and
1971. There was significant consistency between these measures (for all correlations,
p< .001), but the magnitude of these relationships varied among the time intervals
involved. As one would expect, the consistency in attitudes over the 5-year period
(1966-1971) was exceeded by the consistency
in attitudes for the 3-year interval (19661969), which in turn was exceeded by consistency over the 2-year period (1969-1971).
Also, as noted by Epstein (1979), consistency
was improved by the aggregation of measurement. When the 1966 and 1969 satisfaction
data were combined into a single attitudinal
474
Table 1
Correlations of Satisfaction Over Time:
Total Sample
Year
1 1966 Satisfaction
n
2 1969 Satisfaction
1
1966
Satisfaction
1.00
4,549
2
1969
Satisfaction
.32
3,702
1.00
3,807
3 1971 Satisfaction
n
Index of 1966 &
1969
Satisfaction
3
1971
Satisfaction
.29
3,350
.42
3,275
1.00
3,446
.44
3,200
n
Note. All correlations are significant at p < .001.
n
Changed
n
1966 Satisfaction with
1971 Satisfaction
Same
n
Changed
Same
Changed
.47
2156
.36
891
.37
.23
.24
274
.19
1232
1121
1711
2114
Changed
.39
.31
171
.33
735
868
.37
164
.34
714
475
Table 3
SE
Total sample
1966 Satisfaction
Change in Pay
Change in Status
.276
.281
.282
.272
.000590
-.000195
.01932
.00023
.00012
197.84**
6.55*
2.48
.355
.357
.352
.000378
.02700
.00030
171.47**
1.59
.254
.257
.256
.000642
.03953
.00059
41.92"
1.19
.224
.224
.224
.228
.000133
.000532
.06985
.00089
.00431
10.68**
0.02
0.02
.140
.185
.186
.132
.00125
.000087
.04644
.00052
.00023
8.10**
5.84*
0.14
Predictor
476
477
Effects
478
479
480
Instructions to Authors
Articles submitted for publication in the Journal of Applied Psychology are evaluated according
to the following criteria: (a) significance of contribution, (b) technical adequacy, (c) appropriateness
for the journal, and (d) clarity of presentation. In addition, articles must be clearly written in
concise and unambiguous language. They must be logically organized, progressing from a
statement of problem or purpose, through analysis of evidence, to conclusions and implications.
Authors should prepare manuscripts according to the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (3rd ed.). Articles not prepared according to the guidelines of the
Manual will not be reviewed. All manuscripts must include an abstract of 100-150 words typed
on a separate sheet of paper. Typing instructions (all copy must be double-spaced) and instructions
on preparing tables, figures, references, metrics, and abstracts appear in the Manual. Also, all
manuscripts are subject to editing for sexist language.
Authors can refer to recent issues of the journal for approximate length of regular articles.
(Three double-spaced manuscript pages equal one printed page.) A few longer articles of special
significance are occasionally published as monographs. Short Notes feature brief reports on
studies such as those involving some methodological contribution or important replication.
APA policy prohibits an author from submitting the same manuscript for concurrent consideration by two or more journals. APA policy also prohibits duplicate publication, that is,
publication of a manuscript that has already been published in whole or in substantial part in
another journal. Also, authors of manuscripts submitted to APA journals are expected to have
available their raw data throughout the editorial review process and for at least 5 years after
the date of publication.
Anonymous reviews are optional, and authors who wish anonymous reviews must specifically
request them when submitting their manuscripts. Each copy of a manuscript to be anonymously
reviewed should include a separate title page with authors' names and affiliations, and these
should not appear anywhere else on the manuscript. Footnotes that identify the authors should
be typed on a separate page. Authors should make every effort to see that the manuscript itself
contains no clues to their identities.
Manuscripts should be submitted in quadruplicate and all the copies should be clear, readable,
and on paper of good quality. A dot matrix or unusual typeface is acceptable only if it is clear
and legible. Authors should keep a copy of the manuscript to guard against loss. Mail manuscripts
to the Editor, Robert Guion, Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling
Green, Ohio 43403.