is involvement a suppressor of the job satisfaction–life satisfaction relationship?

Is Involvement a Suppressor of the Job Satisfaction-Life Satisfaction Relationship?’

KLAUS M O S E R ~ HEINZ SCHULER Faculty of Business Administration,

Economics, and Social Sciences University of Erlangen-Niirnberg

Faculty of Business, Economics, and Social Services

University of Hohenheim Niirnbergj Germany Stuttgart, Germany

Previous research has demonstrated a considerable correlation between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. In addition, various researchers have hypothesized that job importance (work involvement) should be a moderator of this relationship. However, most empirical tests did not confirm this assumption. We argue that job importance cannot turn out to be a moderator because the subjective importance of work is already part of job- satisfaction judgments, a notion that has been advanced by Locke (1969) as implicit importance weighting. However, a suppressor effect can be predicted because job importance should be correlated with job satisfaction, but not life satisfaction. In a study of recently hired incumbents (N = 811) in a large German electronics company, we distinguished between job involvement and work involvement. We considered the latter, but not the former, being a measure of job importance. Work involvement, but not job involvement, turned out to be a suppressor of the relation between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.

Studies on the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction can be traced back to the 1950s and continue to the present (e.g., Iverson & Maguire, 2000). Tait, Padgett, and Baldwin (1 989) conducted a meta-analysis of 34 studies and found a mean uncorrected correlation of .35. This shows that there exists some common variance between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. In addition, Tait et al. found that the correlation between job satisfaction and life satisfaction increased during the preceding decades for women, but not for men. These authors assumed involvement to be a moderator of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship and suggested that “greater involvement of women in their

’This research was supported partially by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation MO 722/6-1). The authors thank Mike Smith, Gerhard Blickle, and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on previous versions of the manuscript.

2Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Klaus Moser, Organizational and Social Psychology, University of Erlangen-Nurnberg, Lange Gasse 20, D-90403 Nurnberg, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]

2377

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2004, 34, 1 1, pp. 2377-2388. Copyright 0 2004 by V. H. Winston & Son, Inc. All rights reserved.

2378 MOSER AND SCHULER

jobs would tend to increase the amount of overlap between work and life attitudes” (p. 505).

Indeed, Tait et al. (1989) were not the only authors who assumed involvement to be a moderator of the relation between job satisfaction and life satisfaction (Rice, McFarlin, Hunt, & Near, 1985). Generally, the assumption that involvement or the importance of work in one’s life-two variables often considered synonymous-moderates the relation between job satisfaction3 and life satisfaction was denoted as the disaggregation hypothesis (Rain, Lane, & Steiner, 1991; Rice, Near, & Hunt, 1980; Steiner & Truxillo, 1989).

In the more recent research literature, the hypothesis that the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction differs between individuals has con- tinued to be investigated. For example, Judge and Watanabe (1994) investigated whether different theories of the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction are correct for different individuals. More specifically, while they found that the relationship is positive for most individuals, this was not true for all.4

In addition, research on work-family conflict (Adams, King, & King, 1996; Kossek & Ozeki, 1998) has suggested that individuals might differ in their relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. For example, Adams et al. found that workers who reported higher job involvement reported both higher levels of job satisfaction and higher levels of work interfering with family. In addition, work interfering with family had a negative relationship with both job satisfaction and life satisfaction (cf. Kossek & Ozeki, 1998). This seems to suggest again that the size of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship depends on the level of involvement.

Why does it seem plausible that involvement is a moderator of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship? The typical explanation starts with the

30ne reviewer o f a previous version of this paper emphasized that some authors have called for redirections in job satisfaction research (e.g., Bussing, 1992). However, most researchers still think that job satisfaction stays an important topic in research and application. For example, Cranny, Smith, and Stone (1 992) stated

Job satisfaction is one of the most widely discussed and enthusiastically studied constructs in such related disciplines as industrial-organizational psychology, social psychology, organizational behavior, personnel, and human resource management. It is also of pressing and recurring interest to managers in a variety of settings and, of course, to those who work with and for them. (p. XV)

We agree that alternate views of job satisfaction-especially concerning measurement issues (e.g., Bussing, 1 9 9 2 t a r e worthy of being pursued. However, we also think that job satisfaction measurement by means of attitude-based scales is s t i l l a viable idea.

40ther streams of research are investigating the causal order of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship (e.g., Judge & Watanabe, 1993) or the role of dispositional effects on both variables (Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, 1998). However, these issues are beyond the scope of the current research article.

IS INVOLVEMENT A SUPPRESSOR? 2379

assumption that some kind of spillover occurs: The job is part of one’s life, and therefore if someone is more satisfied with his or her job, he or she should be so with life, too. In addition, this spillover should be stronger for people whose job is a more important part in their lives. However, disconfirming findings concerning involvement as a moderator of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship have been reported in the literature. For example, Rice et al. (1 985) investigated whether indicators of job importance moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Contrary to their hypothesis, no moderator effect was found. In another study, Steiner and colleagues (Steiner, 1990; Steiner & Truxillo, 1989) found that importance of work did not moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.

In an effort to explain the nonexistent moderator effect of involvement, Rice et al. (1985) advanced Locke’s (1 969) approach of implicit importance weightings. According to this reasoning, any measure of satisfaction implicitly reflects the importance of the issue. Simply put, satisfaction scores already contain implicit importance weights. Therefore, “there is no value in using importance weightings in efforts to enhance the predictive power of satisfaction scores” (Rice et al., 1985, p. 309). Concerning job satisfaction, job importance would be the corresponding weight and involvement can be considered the respective measure of job importance. Involvement should turn out as a moderator of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship if it could be measured separately; that is, in an explicit way. However, because job satisfaction scores already implicitly contain this importance weight, no moderator effect can be d e t e ~ t e d . ~

The implicit importance weighting approach has two further consequences. First, substantial correlations between job satisfaction and job importance should be expected. This is true because an interaction term must be correlated with both predictors (e.g., Cohen & Cohen, 1983). Second, job importance should be correlated with job satisfaction, whereas there are no strong arguments for expecting a relation between job importance and life satisfaction. A recent meta-analysis (Brown, 1996) partially confirmed this reasoning: Whereas there resulted a substantial correlation between involvement and work satisfaction (r = .37), the relationship between involvement and life satisfaction was smaller ( r = .13).

A closer look at the mentioned relationships suggests that there indeed exists a more direct test of the implicit importance weighting. If it is true that involvement is correlated with job satisfaction but not with life satisfaction, it should not turn out to be a moderator but rather a suppressor of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship. That is, if involvement is statistically controlled, the

5Note that this is not a matter of insufficient measures but of the cognitive processes within the incumbents.


relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction should increase.6 In the following, we will comment on preliminary evidence for a suppressor effect of involvement in the related literature and then test this hypothesis by new data. However, we will first briefly discuss the meaning and measurement of involvement.

Job Importance, Work Involvement, and Job Involvement

The concept of involvement has been identified as a rather elusive and com- plex variable (e.g., Brown, 1996; Rabinowitz & Hall, 1977). Kanungo (1982) proposed that it is important to distinguish between job involvement and work involvement (Elloy & Terpening, 1992). Though it is plausible that some relationship (correlation) between these two types of involvement exists, they can be distinguished both theoretically and empirically. Job involvement is related more closely to satisfaction with specific attributes of the current job. Contrary to this more situationally dependent type of involvement, work involvement is more closely related to work in general; that is, to the importance of work in one’s life (central life interest; Saleh & Hosek, 1976). This means that work involvement is not as closely related to the current job, but is a more stable disposition. Indeed, Kanungo found a much stronger relationship between job satisfaction and job involvement than between job satisfaction and work involvement (see also Misra, Kanungo, von Rosenstiel, & Stuhler, 1985).7 In sum, researchers should distinguish two types of involvement: job involvement and work involvement.

In addition, both kinds of involvement can be distinguished clearly from job satisfaction, though the correlation of job satisfaction with work involvement should be even lower than the correlation with job involvement. In the current study, we will investigate the role of involvement in job satisfaction-life satisfaction research. Because most of the previous research we have reviewed in the previous section considers a job importance interpretation of involvement, we

6These methodological arguments for a suppressor effect can be supplemented by two furthcr ideas. First, people highly involved in their work invest much time and energy in their jobs. This might contribute to performance improvement and more satisfaction in their jobs, but less so outside thc job; for example, because of neglect of family and friends. Second, people highly involved would experience higher dissonance if they had a dissatisfying job. Thus, they would exaggerate their job satisfaction. However, this part of job satisfaction would not spIll over to lifc satisfaction. We thank an anonymous reviewer for this suggcstion.

7Some authors even had reservations that job satisfaction and job involvement can be discerned at all. However, research has demonstrated discriminant validity for these two constructs (e.g., Brooke, Russcll, & Price, 1988). From a conceptual point of view, both job satisfaction and job involvement can be regarded as attitudes toward the specific job. Whereas job satisfaction is an “emotional state of liking one’s job” (Brooke et al., 1988, p. 139), job involvement is a “cognitive belief state ofpsychological identification with one’sjob” (Brooke et al., 1988, p. 139).


hypothesize that work involvement (meaning of work in general) is the relevant variable when investigating the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship.

Involvement as a Suppressor of the Job Satisfaction-Life Satisfaction Relationship

As already stated in the Introduction, an argument can be made that involvement is a suppressor of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship. Preliminary evidence can be found in Schmitt, White, Coyle, and Rauschen- berger (1979). The authors found fairly high correlations between job satisfaction and life satisfaction ( r = .25), as well as between job satisfaction and involvement ( r = .3 1). However, the correlation between involvement and life satisfaction approached zero (r = .04). Schmitt et al. supposed that job involvement acts as a suppressor variable and presented the following explanation: “Individuals who are happy with work tend to be happy with retirement (i.e., life satisfaction); but if their work is the central thing in their lives, they will find retirement activities less than satisfying” (p. 289).

In other words, Schmitt et al. ( I 979) suggested that involvement (work being the central thing in life) correlates with job satisfaction but not, or even nega- tively, with life satisfaction. More formally speaking (cf. Tzelgov & Henik, 199 I ), a suppressor effect exists when

The correlation between the criterion (c) and the predictor (p) is denoted as rep; the correlation between the criterion and the suppressor (s) is denoted as rcs; and the correlation between the predictor and the suppressor is denoted as rp,s. For the data from Schmitt et al. (1979), it can be computed that

( .24- .04 *.31) - .25 = .01 > 0.

(1 - .312)

Hence, involvement turns out to be a suppressor in the Schmitt et al. (1 979) study. There are, however, two problems related with the results from Schmitt et al. First, they named their involvement measure job involvement. According to the distinction made by Rabinowitz and Hall (1977), Kanungo (1982), and others, their interpretation (work being the central thing in life) seems to be more consistent with the definition of work involvement. In fact, Schmitt et at. used the involvement scale from Lawler and Hall (1970). However, previous research has demonstrated that this scale turned out to be heterogeneous (Saleh & Hosek, 1976). Therefore, it is not clear whether work involvement or job involvement


was the crucial variable in Schmitt et al .3 study. Second, the participants were retired when the data were collected; that is, Schmitt et al. analyzed retrospective involvement and job satisfaction.

In sum, it seems to be necessary to scrutinize the suppressor effect found by Schmitt et al. (1979) with a sample of participants currently employed and with a distinction between job involvement and work involvement. More specifically, consistent with previous studies ( e g , Kanungo, 1982; Misra et al., 1985), we expect the following:

Hypothesis I. The relationship between job involvement and job satisfaction will be greater than the relationship between work involvement and job satisfaction.

In addition, the correlation between work involvement and life satisfaction should be rather small (cf. Schmitt et al., 1979), whereas at least some common variance between job satisfaction and life satisfaction can be expected; for example, because both represent in part more or less positive emotional states in one’s current life. Therefore we assume the following:

Hypothesis 2. The relationship between job involvement and life satisfaction will be greater than the relationship between work involvement and life satisfaction.

Finally, we expect a suppressor effect:

Hypothesis 3. There will exist a suppressor effect as a result of work involvement but not job involvement on the relation between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.

Method

We conducted a cross-sectional study with professionals (mainly engineers), 97.2% of whom had a tenure of 2 years or less in a large German electronic company. Their ages ranged from 23 to 54 years, with a median of 29 years and 5.1 % ( N = 41) were female. About 1,200 questionnaires were distributed by the organization; 50 questionnaires were returned because the prospective respondent was unknown or no longer in the organization. A total of 8 1 1 usable questionnaires were received, which approximates a return rate of about 70.5%.

Involvement was measured by a seven-item scale. The items were adapted or slightly modified from the larger Lodahl and Kejner (1965) scale.* It has been

8We tried to ensure construct validity of the items by means of the back-translation method.


Table 1

Comparison of LISREL Models,for Involvement Items

Adjuste Root Parsi- Good- dgood- mean monious nessof nessof square Normed normed

Model q’f x2 fit index fit index residual fit index fit index

Nulla 21 768.74* .726 .634 .374 - -

Single-factor 14 170.71* .941 382 .133 ,778 S19 Two uncorrelated

factors 14 207.96* .933 366 .231 .729 .486 Two correlated

factors 13 95.91* .966 .926 .lo5 3 7 5 .542

Note. All models were tested using covariance matrices and maximum likelihood esti- mation. ax = 4; OJ= 0; A, = I; q5 = diagonal and free. * p < .oo 1.

proposed (Saleh & Hosek, 1976) that the scale contains both job involvement and work involvement items. Indeed, three of the items tap job involvement (sample item: “For me, mornings at work really fly by”), whereas the other four items tap work involvement (sample item: “The most important things that happen to me involve my work”).

Job satisfaction and life satisfaction were both measured by means of faces scales (Kunin, 1955), which where anchored by seven faces, arranged from sad to happy. Participants were instructed to check the face that best portrays their satisfaction. Scarpello and Campbell (1983) showed that single-item responses are appropriate when summary judgments are investigated (Bretz & Thompsett, 1992; Wanous, Reichers, & Hudy, 1997). In addition, these authors also reported evidence for the reliability of faces scales.

Results

In a first step, we investigated whether a two-factor solution (i.e., the job involvement-work involvement distinction) fit the data better than did a one- factor solution. Therefore, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses using LISREL 7 (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1989). Since we did not expect that job involvement and work involvement would be totally independent, we considered measurement models with both uncorrelated and correlated factors (Table 1).


Table 2

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Between Involvement and Satisfaction Variables

M SD N 2 3 4

1. Job involvement 6.14 2.37 798 .39 .34 .20 2. Work involvement 17.28 4.05 796 .19 .02 3. Job satisfaction 5.28 1.16 806 .30 4. Life satisfaction 5.55 1.14 801 -

Note. Because of missing values sample sizes are less than N = 8 11.

We compared the proposed two-dimensional model of involvement with three alternative models to see which was most consistent with the data. The bases for these comparisons are increments in various fit indexes calculated from the most restrictive null model. The two-factor model with correlated factors fit better than the other on all fit indexes used: chi square, goodness of fit, adjusted goodness of fit, root mean square residual, normed fit, and parsimonious normed fit (for more details, see Joreskog & Sorbom, 1989). The results in Table 1 show that a model with two correlated factors represented the best fit for the data. The last model’s superiority can be demonstrated additionally by a chi-square difference test comparing this model with the model with two uncorrelated factors (x2 difference=207.96-95.91 = 112.05;df= 14- 1 3 = l;p<.OOl).

Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlations between the measures.9 Job involvement was more highly (r = .34) correlated with job satisfaction than work involvement (r = .19). The difference between these correlations is highly significant ( z = 3.2 I , p < .OO 1). Therefore, Hypothesis 1 was confirmed.

Contrary to job involvement, work involvement correlated approximately zero with life satisfaction ( r = .02 vs. .20; z = 3 . 6 1 ; ~ < .00l). Therefore, Hypothesis 2 was confirmed. In addition, this suggests that a suppressor effect of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship can be expected. By means of Tzelgov and Henik’s ( 1991) equation, it can be shown that this is true for work involvement:

9We also reanalyzed the data controlling for gender of the participants. However, no remarkable effect could be observed. For example, correlations between job satisfaction and life satisfaction did not differ for men ( r = .30) and women ( r = .3 1). Therefore, we do not reporl separate analyses.


In addition, job involvement did not emerge as a suppressor of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship:

In sum, Hypothesis 3 was confirmed. Work involvement but not job involvement was a suppressor of the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.

Discussion

The relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction has been a topic of empirical research since the 1950s. More recently, researchers have investigated whether the size of the relationship depends on various moderators and, especially, on participants’ involvement (Rain et al., 1991; Tait et al., 1989). In the current investigation, we have been pursuing another line of thought. We developed the hypothesis that involvement is a suppressor of the job satisfaction- life satisfaction relationship. In addition, following other researchers (Brown, 1996; Kanungo, 1982; Saleh & Hosek, 1976), we distinguished between job involvement and work involvement and hypothesized that work involvement but not job involvement is a suppressor of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship.

Is the distinction between job involvement and work involvement really worth being emphasized? Our answer is “Yes.” First, confirmatory factor analysis yielded the best fit for a two-factor model. Second, predictable discriminant validities were found. In comparison with work involvement, job involvement showed a closer relation with job satisfaction. This can be explained by the more enduring quality of work involvement (not specific for the current job), as opposed to job involvement. In addition, this result is consistent with those of Kanungo (1 982) and Misra et al. (1985). Third, Schmitt et al. (1979) found no relationship between involvement and life satisfaction ( r = .04). We supposed this to be true for work involvement but not for job involvement. Our data support this distinction. Fourth, work involvement, but not job involvement, turned out to be a suppressor of the relation between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Work involvement met the ideal preconditions of a (classical) suppressor variable: correlation with the predictor (job satisfaction), but not with the criterion (life satisfaction).

Unfortunately, the suppressor effect found in the current study is small. In addition, to our knowledge, evaluation of the size of suppressor effects has not attracted much attention in the research literature (however, see Collins & Schmidt, 1997), and there exists no convincing method of statistical significance


testing of suppressor effects (Smith, Ager, & Williams, 1992). From a theoretical point of view, the suppressor in our study could be predicted, and therefore has a sound status. We suggest that its size will increase if future studies further improve the measurement of the relevant variables. For example, Kanungo ( 1 982) proposed two alternative scales that could be more suitable for the discriminant assessment of job and work involvement. In our study, we were able to demonstrate that items of the mostly used Lohdahl and Kejner scale (Brown, 1996) are also suited to discern these two aspects of involvement.

Job satisfaction is an important indicator of the quality of work life, and life satisfaction is an indicator of the quality of life in general. Research has shown that a relation exists between job satisfaction and life satisfaction (Tait et al., 1989). Therefore, some have argued that job satisfaction contributes to life satisfaction (e.g., Rice et al., 1985). If this is true, it seems hard to believe that work involvement (job importance) is not a moderator of this relationship. The current study draws on Locke’s notion of implicit importance weighting, from which a suppressor effect of work involvement can be derived. That is, work involvement is a measure of job importance, but it has an already implicit weight in job satisfaction scores. Therefore, it cannot turn out as a separate moderator, but only as a suppressor. In sum, this effect supports the important role of work involvement for a more thorough understanding of the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship.

References

Adams, G. A., King, L. A., & King, D. W. (1 996). Relationship of job and family involvement, family social support, and work-family conflict with job and life satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81,411-420.

Bretz, R. D., Jr., & Thompsett, R. E. (1992). Comparing traditional and integra- tive learning methods in organizational training programs. Journal qfApplied

Brooke, P. P., Jr., Russell, D., & Price, J. L. (1988). Discriminant validation of measures of job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commit- ment. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 73, 139-145.

Brown, S. P. (1996). A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 235-255.

Bussing, A. (1992). A dynamic view of job satisfaction in psychiatric nurses in Germany. Work and 5%-ess, 6, 239-259.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1 983). Applied multiple repression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Collins, J. M., & Schmidt, F. L. (1997). Can suppressor variables enhance criterion-related validity in the personality domain? Educational und Psycho- logical Measurement, 57, 924-936.

Psychology, 77, 94 1-95 1.


Cranny, C . J., Smith, P. C., & Stone, E. F. (1992). (Eds.). Job satisfaction. New York, NY: Lexington Books.

Elloy, D. F., & Terpening, W. D. (1992). An empirical distinction between job involvement and work involvement: Some additional evidence. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 24,465-478.

Iverson, R. D., & Maguire, C. (2000). The relationship between job and life satisfaction: Evidence from a remote mining community. Human Relations. 53,

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: SPSS.

Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C., & Kluger, A. N. (1 998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 17-34.

Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78,939-948.

Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1994). Individual differences in the nature of the relationship between job and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 101-107.

Kanungo, R. N. (1 982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 341-349.

Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1 998). Work-family conflict, policies, and the job-life satisfaction relationship: A review and directions for organizational behavior- human resources research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 139-1 49.

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

Lawler, E. E., 111, & Hall, D. T. (1970). Relationship ofjob characteristics to job involvement, satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied Psy-

Locke, E. A. (1 969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4,309-336.

Lodahl, T., & Kejner, M. (1965). The definition and measurement ofjob involvement. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 49,24-33.

Misra, S., Kanungo, R. N., von Rosenstiel, L., & Stuhler, E. A. (1 985). The moti- vational formulation of job and work involvement: A cross-national study. Human Relations, 38, 501-518.

Rabinowitz, S., & Hall, D. T. (1977). Organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 84,265-288.

Rain, J. S., Lane, I. M., & Steiner, D. D. (1991). A current look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationships: Review and future considerations. Human Relations, 44,287-307.

Rice, R. W., McFarlin, D. B., Hunt, R. G., & Near, J. ( 1 985). Job importance as a moderator of the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 6,297-3 16.

807-839.

PsycholoD, 8,65-77.

chology, 54,305-3 12.


Rice, R. W., Near, J. P., & Hunt, R. G. (1980). The job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship: A review of empirical research. Basic and Applied Social

Saleh, S. D., & Hosek, J . (1976). Job involvement: Concepts and measurements. Academy of Management Journal, 19,213-224.

Scarpello, V., & Campbell, J . P. (1983). Job satisfaction: Are all the parts there? Personnel Psychology, 36,577-600.

Schmitt, N., White, J. K., Coyle, B. W., & Rauschenberger, J. ( 1 979). Retirement and life satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 22,282-291.

Smith, R. L., Ager, J. W., & Williams, D. L. (1992). Suppressor variables in multiple regression/correlation. Educational and Psychological Measurement,

Steiner, D. D. ( 1 990). Clarification and correction of Steiner & Truxillo’s ( 1 989) improved test of the disaggregation hypothesis. Journal of Occupational

Steiner, D. D., & Truxillo, D. M. (1989). An improved test of the disaggregation of job and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62,33-39.

Tait, M., Padgett, M. Y., & Baldwin, T. T. (1989). Job and life satisfaction: A reevaluation of the strength of the relationship and gender effects as a func- tion of the date of the study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 502-507.

Tzelgov, J., & Henik, A. (1991). Suppression situations in psychological research: Definitions, implications, and applications. Psychological Bulletin,

Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are single-item measures? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82,

P~ychology, 1,37-64.

52, 17-29.

Psychology, 63,263-264.

109, 524-536.

247-252.

is involvement a suppressor of the job satisfaction–life satisfaction relationship?

Documents