Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations.

Judge, Timothy A.; Locke, Edwin A.; Durham, Cathy C.; Kluger, Avraham N.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.1.17

Cited by 1,777 publications

(2,354 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

2,118

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This distinction has bearing on the present study because it contributes to construct validity relations and analyses. Researchers (e.g., Chen et al, 2001;Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, 1998) have promoted a definition of general self-efficacy as perceived competence across domains. As such, they advocate the stance that general selfefficacy is of more value in predicting direct and indirect effects on beliefs and behavioral performance.…”

Section: Self-efficacy: Theory and Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Witness self‐efficacy: Development and validation of the construct

Cramer

Neal

DeCoster

et al. 2010

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study used a Self-Efficacy Theory (SET; Bandura, 1977Bandura, , 1986 framework to address the need for an outcome measure in witness preparation training. The construct of Witness Self-Efficacy, broadly defined as a witness's perceived ability to testify in court, was developed drawing largely on existing self-efficacy literature. The goal of the study was to establish initial psychometric properties for the Witness Self-Efficacy Scale (WSES).Participants acting either as mock witnesses or jurors took part in a two-phase study.First, 41 mock witnesses were asked to provide a written account of being falsely accused of an act. They were then briefly deposed about the account, and completed the WSES and construct validity questionnaires. Mock witnesses finally testified under cross-examination from a mock attorney about the accusations. In the second portion, a total of 290 mock jurors (six to eight per group) observed videotaped testimonies of participants from phase one. Mock jurors then provided predictive validity ratings of witness credibility, believability, innocence likelihood, efficacy, and agreement with testimony.Bi-variate correlation analyses showed that the WSES was significantly positively related with general self-efficacy, social self-efficacy, and general self-confidence. The WSES was significantly negatively related to introversion. The scale displayed non-significant relations with social desirability, depression, self-esteem, and innocence expectancy. Multivariate regression analyses showed that the scale failed to predict any of the primary mock juror ratings.Follow-up multivariate regression analyses showed that mock juror ratings of witness confidence iii and the WSES predicted dependent measures, although these independent variables were collinear. Finally, there was an interaction between self and observer ratings of the WSES as it predicted witness credibility.Results are discussed with regard to theoretical and applied implications. Contrary to SET, self-reported WSE appears to be largely correlated with confidence and fails to predict outcomes on its own. Concerning witness preparation, the WSES possesses solid construct validity and reliability, but requires further testing within a witness preparation training model to assess its practical utility. A self-efficacy based method of witness preparation is proposed as a manner of continued research using the WSES.

show abstract

Section: Self-efficacy: Theory and Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Witness self‐efficacy: Development and validation of the construct

Cramer

Neal

DeCoster

et al. 2010

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rather, the key question in research on higher order constructs has been, What does it buy us in terms of building new knowledge to study individual variables that may reasonably be considered as measures of the same higher order construct? The answer has been that measures that appear similar should be evaluated, and when there is a conceptual or empirical reason to suggest the existence of a higher order construct, such a commonality should be given attention (Block, 1995;Cronbach, 1956;Dawis, 1992;Judge, Locke, & Durham, 1997; E. L. Kelley, 1927;Watson & Clark). I believe that the conceptual evidence points out that hope, self-efficacy, optimism, and resiliency may share a common confidence core.…”

Section: Generalizabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a core confidence-higher order construct.

Stajković

2006

Journal of Applied Psychology

245

189

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The author develops core confidence as a higher order construct and suggests that a core confidencehigher order construct-not addressed by extant work motivation theories-is helpful in better understanding employee motivation in today's rapidly changing organizations. Drawing from psychology (social, clinical, and developmental) and social anthropology, the author develops propositions regarding the relationships between core confidence and performance, attitudes, and subjective well-being. The core confidence-higher order construct is proposed to be manifested by hope, self-efficacy, optimism, and resilience. The author reasons that these four variables share a common confidence core (a higher order construct) and may be considered as its manifestations. Suggestions for future research and implications of the work are discussed.

show abstract

“…Research indicates that the concept of personal resources may be relevant for work-related wellbeing (Hobfoll, 1989;Judge, Locke, & Durham, 1997). Personal resources are positive self-evaluations linked to resilience, which refer to individuals' sense of their ability to control and impact upon their environment successfully (Hobfoll, Johnson, Ennis, & Jackson, 2003).…”

Section: Career Competencies and Personal Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of career competencies in the Job Demands — Resources model

Akkermans

Schaufeli

Brenninkmeijer

et al. 2013

Journal of Vocational Behavior

150

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the role of career competencies as a mediator in the Job DemandsResources model. Structural equation modeling with data from 305 young employed persons aged 16-30 years showed that career competencies are positively related to job resources and work engagement, but not to job demands and emotional exhaustion. Furthermore, career competencies had a partially mediating effect on the relationship between job resources and work engagement, and job resources had a partially mediating effect on the relationship between career competencies and work engagement. These findings suggest that career competencies may act in a similar way as personal resources in fostering work engagement. Our results underline the importance of combining research on job design and career development, and suggest that career competencies may have a role in stimulating employee wellbeing. Career counselors and HR programs may benefit from this insight by simultaneously increasing job resources and career competencies to increase employee wellbeing.

show abstract

Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations.

Cited by 1,777 publications

References 58 publications

Witness self‐efficacy: Development and validation of the construct

Witness self‐efficacy: Development and validation of the construct

Development of a core confidence-higher order construct.

The role of career competencies in the Job Demands — Resources model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About