Endorsement of the money ethic, income, and life satisfaction

Abstract

The present study investigated the money ethic scale among full‐time employees, part‐time employed students, and non‐employed university students. Confirmatory factor analyses results showed that there was a good fit between the three‐factor model and research data for full‐time employees and non‐employed students and a weaker fit for part‐time employees and the whole sample. Further, factors success and evil were predictors of income for full‐time employees. Money attitudes were not related to pay satisfaction. Factor budget was associated with life satisfaction for full‐time employees and non‐employed students. Full‐time employees in this sample tended to be older, male, and have higher education than part‐time employees and students. Non‐employed students tended to have higher life satisfaction, lower protestant work ethic, less type A behavior pattern, and think more strongly that money does not represent their success, that they budget money carefully, and that money is not evil than part‐time employees.

The relationship between materialism and personal well-being: A meta-analysis.

“…Thus, the current meta-analysis does not include assessments regarding (a) philosophical materialism (i.e., the belief that physical laws concerning matter can answer most questions), (b) beliefs about the goals that a society (as opposed to an individual person) should pursue (as captured, e.g., by Inglehart's, 1981, 1997, materialist andpostmaterialist values), (c) attitudes toward budgeting money or money as good or bad in general (e.g., Tang, Kim, & Tang, 2002), (d) measures of purchases made with the intention of acquiring material possessions (as opposed to obtaining experiences; Carter & Gilovich, 2012;Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003), or (e) measures of power values (which are primarily concerned with having dominance and status over other people ;Schwartz, 1992; see Kasser & Ahuvia, 2002, for discussion of this latter distinction). The measures that fit our definition and are included in the meta-analysis vary in some respects but, generally speaking, follow one of two broad methodological approaches (see Table 1).…”

Materialism and Well–Being in the Uk and Chile: Basic Need Satisfaction and Basic Need Frustration as Underlying Psychological Processes

“…Inglehart, 2000Inglehart, , 2008Inglehart & Baker, 2000); personal attitudes and beliefs towards money (e.g. Tang, Kim, & Tang, 2002;Tang, Tang, & Luna-Arocas, 2005); measures of power values (e.g. Schwartz, 1992); and measures of personality traits such as envy, non-generosity and possessiveness linked to material possessions (e.g.…”

The relative importance of different types of rewards for employee motivation and commitment in South Africa

“…Secondly, other potentially relevant variables were not taken into account. Tang, Kim and Tang (2002), for example, suggest that perceptions of rewards may be affected by personality characteristics. For instance, Type A employees are characterised by an extreme sense of competitiveness, aggressiveness, ambition and tend to value monetary rewards more than the non-monetary rewards.…”