Validity of Single-item Versus Multiple-item Job Satisfaction Measures in Predicting Life: Satisfaction and Turnover Intention

Abstract

The use of single-item (SI) measures to operationalise a construct has endured extensive methodological critique, and its practical advantages over multiple-item (MI) measures pale in comparisons to the theoretical advantages of MI measures. Among constructs that have been operationalised with a single item, job satisfaction remains one of the favourites, although empirical knowledge about its validity is limited to data derived from management, marketing and human resources fields. Little is known about its validity among human service professionals. Using two cross-sectional surveys, the present article describes validity of SI versus MI measures of job satisfaction in predicting life satisfaction and turnover intention among social workers across organisations and professional specialisations, including supervisors, managers and administrators. Results in both studies suggested that SI measure of job satisfaction was methodologically and analytically suitable for examining job-related outcomes. It established convergent validity with MI job satisfaction measures and discriminant validity with job dissatisfaction measures. It demonstrated comparable demographic outcomes, association and predictive relationship with life satisfaction and turnover intention in the same magnitude as MI job satisfaction. It accounted for comparable variance in life satisfaction and turnover intention and generated bivariate, multivariate and mediation model outcomes that are systematically similar to those of MI job satisfaction measures. The article stipulates conditions for the use of SI job satisfaction measures, offers suggestions about how to resolve methodological impasse in choosing between SI and MI measures, and concludes with recommendations that include criteria for choosing between SI and MI measures for research.

Work–Life Conflict and Job Satisfaction: The Moderating Role of Gender and Household Income in Western Europe

“…A potential limitation of our analysis is the use of a single-item question to measure job satisfaction, as the ESS database does not provide alternative options. Nevertheless, it is unlikely that this limitation would significantly alter the results, given the findings of prior studies (Fakunmoju 2020;Bruck et al 2002). However, future studies should test such an assumption.…”

“…Within the ESS, job satisfaction is measured on a self-rated 10-point scale (0-extremely dissatisfied, 10-extremely satisfied). Assessing job satisfaction by using single-item measures is shown to be methodologically and analytically suitable for examining job-related outcomes (Fakunmoju 2020) and as equal (Bowling and Zelazny 2021), or even more favorable in many respects than by using multiple-item measures (Nagy 2002), containing, for instance, more face validity (Wanous et al 1997).…”

Single-item principal stress and coping measures: Concurrent and predictive validity and comparisons to teacher measures.

“…They also found support for concurrent and predictive validity for their single-item measure based on predictions of measures of work, personality, health, and turnover intentions. Fakunmoju (2020) compared single-items versus multiple-item measures of job satisfaction in predicting life satisfaction and turnover intention and concluded that single-items performed as well as the multiple-item measures. Nakata et al (2013) used immunological data to show that a single-item measure of job satisfaction predicted immune responses using biological data.…”

Psychometric Properties of Work–Family Enrichment Self-Efficacy Scale: Lithuanian Version

“…Didesnis balas reiškia aukštesnį pasitenkinimo darbu lygį. Ankstesnių tyrimų rezultatai atskleidė, kad vienas teiginys yra pakankamas įvertinti bendrą pasitenkinimą darbu (pavyzdžiui, Dolbier et al, 2005;Fakunmoju, 2020).…”