The Influence of Work Personality on Job Satisfaction: Incremental Validity and Mediation Effects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing from recent developments regarding the contextual nature of personality (e.g., D. Wood & B. W. Roberts, 2006), we conducted 2 studies (1 cross-sectional and 1 longitudinal over 1 year) to examine the validity of work personality in predicting job satisfaction and its mediation of the effect of global personality on job satisfaction. Study 1 showed that (a) individuals vary systematically in their personality between roles- they were significantly more conscientious and open to experience and less extraverted at work compared to at home; (b) work personality was a better predictor of job satisfaction than both global personality and home personality; and (c) work personality demonstrated incremental validity above and beyond the other two personality measures. Study 2 further showed that each of the work personality dimensions fully mediated the association between its corresponding global personality trait and job satisfaction. Evidence for the discriminant validity of the findings is also presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it