The role of discrete emotions in job satisfaction: A meta-analysis

IF 6.2 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Courtney E. Williams, Jane Shumski Thomas, Andrew A. Bennett, George C. Banks, Allison Toth, Alexandra M. Dunn, Andrew McBride, Janaki Gooty
{"title":"The role of discrete emotions in job satisfaction: A meta-analysis","authors":"Courtney E. Williams,&nbsp;Jane Shumski Thomas,&nbsp;Andrew A. Bennett,&nbsp;George C. Banks,&nbsp;Allison Toth,&nbsp;Alexandra M. Dunn,&nbsp;Andrew McBride,&nbsp;Janaki Gooty","doi":"10.1002/job.2747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The relationship between emotions and job satisfaction is widely acknowledged via affective events theory (AET). Despite its widespread use, AET was not designed to address why specific emotions might differentially relate to job satisfaction. We utilize appraisal theory of emotion to refine AET and provide this nuanced theorizing. We meta-analytically test our ideas with 235 samples across 99 883 individuals and 22 600 intra-individual episodes. We test two approaches—specific emotion experiences (16 discrete emotions) versus general emotion experiences (positive or negative emotions)—and present empirical evidence of their similarities and differences with job satisfaction. Our findings suggest that specific emotions with circumstance-agency appraisals (e.g., depression and happiness) have the strongest associations with job satisfaction compared to emotions with self- and other-agency appraisals and general emotion experiences. However, more variability is observed for negative emotions and job satisfaction compared to positive emotions. Further, we address and even challenge influential critiques of emotions and job satisfaction via a meta-analytic test of five moderators—emotion intensity versus frequency, target of emotion, job satisfaction measure, level of analysis, and time referent for emotion and job satisfaction recall. In sum, we advance academic and practitioner understanding of the relationship between emotions and job satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":48450,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 1","pages":"97-116"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/job.2747","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.2747","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The relationship between emotions and job satisfaction is widely acknowledged via affective events theory (AET). Despite its widespread use, AET was not designed to address why specific emotions might differentially relate to job satisfaction. We utilize appraisal theory of emotion to refine AET and provide this nuanced theorizing. We meta-analytically test our ideas with 235 samples across 99 883 individuals and 22 600 intra-individual episodes. We test two approaches—specific emotion experiences (16 discrete emotions) versus general emotion experiences (positive or negative emotions)—and present empirical evidence of their similarities and differences with job satisfaction. Our findings suggest that specific emotions with circumstance-agency appraisals (e.g., depression and happiness) have the strongest associations with job satisfaction compared to emotions with self- and other-agency appraisals and general emotion experiences. However, more variability is observed for negative emotions and job satisfaction compared to positive emotions. Further, we address and even challenge influential critiques of emotions and job satisfaction via a meta-analytic test of five moderators—emotion intensity versus frequency, target of emotion, job satisfaction measure, level of analysis, and time referent for emotion and job satisfaction recall. In sum, we advance academic and practitioner understanding of the relationship between emotions and job satisfaction.

Abstract Image

离散情绪在工作满意度中的作用:荟萃分析
情绪与工作满意度之间的关系通过情感事件理论(AET)得到广泛认可。尽管 AET 被广泛使用,但它并不是为了解决为什么特定情绪会与工作满意度产生不同关系而设计的。我们利用情绪评价理论来完善 AET,并提供这种细致入微的理论分析。我们通过对 99 883 个个体和 22 600 个个体内部事件的 235 个样本进行元分析,检验了我们的观点。我们测试了两种方法--特定情绪体验(16 种离散情绪)与一般情绪体验(积极或消极情绪)--并提出了它们与工作满意度异同的实证证据。我们的研究结果表明,与具有自我和他者评价的情绪以及一般情绪体验相比,具有环境-机构评价的特定情绪(如抑郁和快乐)与工作满意度的关联性最强。然而,与积极情绪相比,消极情绪与工作满意度之间的差异更大。此外,我们还通过对五个调节因素--情绪强度与频率、情绪目标、工作满意度测量、分析水平以及情绪和工作满意度回忆的时间参照物--进行元分析测试,来解决甚至挑战对情绪和工作满意度有影响的批评。总之,我们推进了学术界和从业人员对情绪与工作满意度之间关系的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
98
期刊介绍: The Journal of Organizational Behavior aims to publish empirical reports and theoretical reviews of research in the field of organizational behavior, wherever in the world that work is conducted. The journal will focus on research and theory in all topics associated with organizational behavior within and across individual, group and organizational levels of analysis, including: -At the individual level: personality, perception, beliefs, attitudes, values, motivation, career behavior, stress, emotions, judgment, and commitment. -At the group level: size, composition, structure, leadership, power, group affect, and politics. -At the organizational level: structure, change, goal-setting, creativity, and human resource management policies and practices. -Across levels: decision-making, performance, job satisfaction, turnover and absenteeism, diversity, careers and career development, equal opportunities, work-life balance, identification, organizational culture and climate, inter-organizational processes, and multi-national and cross-national issues. -Research methodologies in studies of organizational behavior.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信