Copyright 1991 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.
0021-9010/91/S3.00
Journal of Applied Psychology
1991, Vol. 76, No. 5, 690-697
Meta-Analytic Comparison of the Job Diagnostic Survey and Job
Characteristics Inventory as Correlates of Work Satisfaction and Performance
Yitzhak Fried
Department of Management and Organization Sciences
Wayne State University
Hunter, Schmidt, and Jackson's (1982) meta-analytic procedure was used to compare the relationships of the corresponding scales of the Job Diagnostic Survey and the Job Characteristics Inventory with work satisfaction and performance. The results suggest convergence in the estimated
population correlations of the alternative identity and feedback scales with both satisfaction and
performance. The results further indicate similarity in the estimated relationships of the alternative
autonomy scales with performance and the alternative variety scales with satisfaction. In contrast,
dissimilarity was found in the estimated relationships of the alternative variety scales with performance and the alternative autonomy scales with satisfaction. The latter dissimilarity was particularly substantial. Implications of the present findings are discussed.
of the relation of JDS and JCI scales with work outcomes. The search
included major empirical journals that have published studies in the
area of job design over the past 15 years. These journals were Academy
of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, Human Relations, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, Journal
of Occupational Psychology, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Personnel Psychology, Psychological Reports, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. No
systematic effort was made to identify unpublished studies. However, a
few unpublished studies familiar to the author were examined, bringing the total number of studies reviewed to nearly 200.
The search yielded a sufficient number of correlational studies to
enable a comparative meta-analysis only on the relation of the JDS and
JCI measures with work satisfaction and work performance. Performance data used in the meta-analysis consisted of either supervisory
rating scores or hard (objective) criterion measurements provided by an
organization. Different methods were used to assess performance for
both types of performance data. For example, some studies reported
ratings of overall performance, whereas others averaged ratings across
various performance dimensions. Similarly, different measures were
used to provide objective performance data (e.g., number of units completed in a given time period or number of detected errors. More detailed information on these differences is available on request). Worksatisfaction data were based on measures that assessed the degree of
one's satisfaction from personal development and accomplishment at
work. Hackman and Oldham's (1975) growth-satisfaction measure was
also included because its underlying construct and the content of its
items were very similar to those of other work-satisfaction measures (cf.
Fried & Ferris, 1987; Hackman & Oldham, 1975).
Of the total studies reviewed, 79 were included in the present analysis because they provided information on one or more of the following
statistical indices required for the meta-analysis: (a) standard deviation
of a job-characteristic scale; (b) an estimated reliability (Cronbach's
alpha) of a job-characteristic scale or work outcome; and (c) a correlation coefficient of a job-characteristic scale with a focal outcome. The
meta-analytic procedure used in this study requires that the sample
size associated with each correlation also be recorded. Of the 79 studies, 27 provided correlation coefficients between the JDS and JCI
scales with the focal outcomes (see Appendix). Three of these studies
contained relevant correlation coefficients for two separate samples,
bringing the total number of samples with correlational information
to 30.
The Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS; Hackman & Oldham, 1975)
and, albeit to a lesser extent, the Job Characteristics Inventory
(JCI; Sims, Szilagyi, & Keller, 1976) have served as the principal
self-report measures for assessing job characteristics. To date,
however, there has been a dearth of research on the convergent
validity between corresponding scales of these alternative measures. For example, after a comprehensive review of the literature, I found only one study (Pierce & Dunham, 1978) that
directly correlated the corresponding scales of the JDS and JCI.
Moreover, there has been no attempt in the literature to compare systematically the relation of the alternative JDS and JCI
scales with focal work outcomes (e.g., work satisfaction, performance). However, because a number of studies exist that have
used either the JDS or JCI to explore job characteristics-outcomes relations, it is possible to use the correlations reported in
these studies to conduct a comparative analysis.
In the present study, the meta-analytic procedure of Hunter,
Schmidt, and Jackson (1982) was used to explore the relations
of the JDS and JCI scales with work satisfaction and performance. This technique was chosen over a narrative review because it accumulates findings across studies while controlling
for statistical artifacts that can bias results and conclusions.
Method
Sample
A literature search was conducted to identify studies that provided
the statistical information necessary for a meta-analytic investigation
The research was part of Yitzhak Fried's doctoral dissertation,
which was completed at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Preparation of this article was partially supported by a fellowship from the College of Urban, Labor & Metropolitan Affairs, Wayne
State University.
I acknowledge Greg Oldham, Ray Aldag, Robert Tiegs, and Margaret Padgett for their helpful comments and suggestions on an earlier
version of the article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Yitzhak Fried, Department of Management and Organization Sciences,
School of Business, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202.
690
META-ANALYTIC COMPARISON OF THE JDS AND JCI
Table 1 summarizes information on the characteristics of these samples. The table indicates some noticeable similarities in the characteristics of the studies that used the JDS measure and those that used the
JCI measure. For example, both groups presented data from public,
private, and governmental organizations, and both groups consisted
primarily of field studies. Moreover, the data in both groups of studies
were based on multiple job or occupation categories. Such similarities
enhanced the validity of a comparative analysis regarding the findings
of the two groups of studies.
Procedure and Analysis
The statistical artifacts considered in this study were sampling error,
predictor and criterion unreliability, and range variation of the independent variables. Following Hunter et al. (1982), each artifact's distribution was based on the statistical information (i.e., correlation coefficients, sample sizes, estimated reliabilities, and standard deviations)
provided by the 79 studies included in the analysis. On the basis of this
information, the average observed (uncorrected) correlations and their
variances were computed and then corrected for the statistical artifacts
to provide estimates of true correlation coefficients and corrected variances in the reference population (see Hunter et al., 1982, pp. 73-80).
Correction for range variation of a given independent variable (i.e., a
job characteristic) required an estimation of the population standard
deviation of this variable. In the present study, the population standard
deviations of the JDS scales were estimated using the data of Oldham,
Hackman, and Stepina (1979). The population standard deviations of
the JCI scales were estimated using the data of Sims et al. (1976). Both
of these data sets seem to be appropriate for population estimation
because they provide information on job characteristics across a variety of major occupations.
For each job characteristic-outcome relation, the ratio between the
unexplained (residual) variance and the observed variance across the
studies' correlations was computed to determine whether true variance remained after correcting for the various statistical artifacts. Following Pearlman, Schmidt, and Hunter (1980), the unexplained variance was considered to be meaningful (also referred to as true variance
in the literature) if it was more than 25% of the total observed variance.
Meaningful unexplained variance may be accounted for by moderating variables (see, e.g., Hunter et al., 1982).
Finally, a 90% confidence interval was computed around each
corrected mean correlation to determine whether this correlation is
significantly different from zero. The computations of confidence intervals for the corrected mean correlations involved several steps.
First, confidence intervals were generated around each uncorrected
sample-size weighted mean correlation using the standard error of the
mean correlation. Two different formulas were used to compute the
confidence intervals depending on whether true variance was present
(heterogeneous samples) or not (homogeneous samples) after corrections for the various artifacts (see, e.g., Hunter & Schmidt, 1990, ch. 9).
The endpoints of each confidence interval were then corrected for measurement error and range restriction using the same formula that was
used to correct the observed sample-size weighted mean correlation
for these artifacts (Hunter & Schmidt, 1990, ch. 3; Hunter et al., 1982).
Results and Discussion
Table 2 provides descriptive statistics concerning the reported internal consistency estimates of the focal independent
and dependent variables. On the basis of the median reliability
value of each scale, it can be concluded that reliability estimates
of the JDS and JCI scales are sufficiently high for research
purposes. Nevertheless, consistent with Aldag, Barr, and Brief
(1981), the median internal consistency of a focal JCI scale was
691
higher than that of the corresponding JDS scale. However, because the JDS scales consist of three items per scale and the JCI
scales have between four to six items per scale, the SpearmanBrown prophecy formula was used to adjust the estimated reliabilities of each JDS scale to the number of items of the corresponding JCI scale. As expected, this analysis resulted in
greater similarity of the reliability estimates of the alternative
scales (see Table 2).
Table 3 summarizes the relation between the alternative
scales of the two measures and individual reactions. Because
the corrected mean of the sample correlations represents the
population estimate of the correlation between the explored
job-characteristic scale and outcome, it was appropriate to
make relative comparisons among the different estimates.
Overall, the meta-analytic results showed similarities in six of
the eight comparative relations. For these six relations, the differences between the corrected mean correlations of the focal
alternative scales with satisfaction or performance ranged between .03 and .07. The two other comparisons produced differences in the estimated correlations of .12 and .33.
Focusing on the specific scales, the results indicated similarity in the estimated relations of the JDS and JCI identity scales
as well as the JDS and JCI feedback scales with both satisfaction
and performance. That is, the estimated population correlations of the JDS and JCI identity scales with satisfaction were
.32 and .39, respectively; and the estimated population correlations of these scales with performance were. 13 and. 17, respectively. The estimated population correlations of JDS and JCI
job-feedback scales with satisfaction were .56 and .52, respectively; and the estimated population correlations of these scales
with performance were .22 and .19, respectively. It should be
noted, however, that the 90% confidence interval for the JCI
feedback-performance relation ranges from —.02 to .39, indicating that the corrected mean correlation of .19 was marginally nonsignificant at the .10 level of probability.
Concerning variance of the studies' correlations, no true variance was detected in the relations of the alternative scales of
both identity and feedback with satisfaction. In addition, true
variance was detected in the relations of the alternative scales of
job feedback with performance, but was not detected in the
relations of the alternative identity scales with this outcome.
The construct validity of the JDS and JCI identity and feedback scales is further bolstered by a number of studies reporting factor-analytic solutions of both the JDS and JCI measures
that were consistent with the a priori structure of these scales
(see, e.g., Aldag et al., 1981; Fried & Ferris, 1986,1987, for reviews). Moreover, on the basis of content analysis of the JDS
and JCI scales, Pierce, McTavish, and Knudson (1986) reported
that the two identity scales (a) converge with the conceptual
definition of identity and (b) are distinguishable from both the
other job-characteristics scales and satisfaction measures.
Pierce et al.'s analysis provided similar support for the construct
validity of the JDS feedback scale, but less support for the construct validity of the JCI feedback scale.
The analysis concerning the relations of autonomy and skill
variety with the focal outcomes produced mixed results. Specifically, JDS and JCI variety scales showed similar relations with
satisfaction, whereas JDS and JCI autonomy scales produced
similar relations with performance. However, the JCI variety
692
a
§
•v
2
-Q
o
*•>
-g
&
f
•Ss:
"" S
in
°"
~
Q
•Q
c
c c
v, .5 .2 .2
|
| 11
2
1 11
•|8.g
ca
>
0
^3
C g
.2>
^u.
«
—
U
c
Sill
>.
C
2
E
<
Z
<
2
22
[T |
[T| [j^
^3
^.
^-^
to
'S
fli
S
£
I
<2
1
1o"
l||f§
"§ OO
Q2
"^
tl 1^ t/3 C/3
C
HSfl S
I
^_
<U
00
Z
<
z
211
a.
« -g
TD
"O
"O
T3
'S ^ T3
E
E
E
E
O1 E
^
5.
^
5.
2
2
2
22
[i 1
y^
u-
[T| [T
<
z
n l/~>
^ rsim
>n
2 <2
7 z7
b"l^
S M 'c
•cIt
o
2
E
^
c
£•
H
5
faction (JDI),
rformance-supervisory
|o
1
1/3
faction (Scott, 1967),
rformance-objective
:ords
faction (JDS; Hackman &
dham, 1975),
rformance-supervisory
ings
faction (JDI; P. C. Smith,
:ndall, & Hulin, 1969),
rformance-supervisory
Criteria measures
ics Inventory (JCI)
YITZHAK FRIED
ii
c
^
Z
^3
0 -..
ii 7 5.
Ox
ii 7
Z c ^^3 oCN Z _ K
O
^3 (N
m
m
ii
<^J
c
Z *•
0
1
1
co
S
c
~S
(30
.a
Q
.0
<u
X
</J
z
Z
'sf ^i
£5
I E < oo
*gz t S
u1
u
^2
o
o
^ oo <;
oo'ouZ~
<
a;
g a-S
- a
g g
Sg
gg
IE
o 0
i*
A
Q
< ; . « < ;
Z~ 'Z'oZ'
2^
WJ
ooj: of
Q
<
Eg <
*f z
1^
1 o.
o ^
-£jj
'-S
10
"
<
oi)
II
II
g j=
|
«J
c 00 t«
o T3 c5
>i
<
-
CO
^ ^
z^z^
^ 00
5
*o
II
2 -11
8
|
§
S !§
g" c
SS
< | s < |E
z * g z *f
1" 1""
•Ida
ofessional
b title and pos
nd Performs
o
—^
u
o
'S<u
c/0
D-
"3 "a
'C
'Cfll
flj
<U
OO OD
& cd
c c
,w
>
Jj
C/)
c
4>
*o3
SS
-l_.i
£ c
op
<
^
Z~
0
1 ^
» M
H"
<<
zz
P ^
5
|
s
1
•c
B.
U
OH
C/5
'E
_>
> >
|"
jiil .s
"3
c
6
-p
3 _
C
.2
fe "C
CX QJ
C/5
C/5
cu
u
S
^
O
<J
S
3
'E
1
CL
C
g <%
E
c
1 „
u
E |-a
I
E
>
0
^> >
'S
.*•
•-
o
•-
•-
o o. n.
o
OO
^f
O
OO
^O
O
S
S
O
0
r-
00
^
OO
CC
Tf OO
2
ii "5.
-1
"3.
p • II
JS
vo'
— (N
ca
C/J
^S1
.g
^
3
O
.^
'aracter
D
^^
<
<
JH
rt
s
o
^
J3
,-
C
Is
a
u
"
^"S
•^
^ 0
•2" 0
1 c •**
ii
c3
F
Z
3
a
c
.g
3
C3 •^
Z
a
S!
s;
u
•^
•O
W
aa
7,
%>
"3
x
"^
ca
"f
t!
J^
c
1
-g
%••
-^
ca
3
cj ca
Q
"~
T3
3
I
X
s
O0
c^
<
'u ^
oa
Illl
ill?!2S
£
f*>>
*-;
Cj
Q oj
u.
~
_
3 ^-
,
|
nfp-
°°
°
^^
O*^
*~*
1
2
«
cx^
°^5
r~~, Qv
*p
o>" o^
OO
<u Ov
1^
^
^
^^« ^ E8 o\
Is Is g- § |s;| ^ & Hit c
c
¥ t^
5? ^ •«g S ^ g i|^
32
c ^ - g o v -o
.S
CD
i
i
^
5 o 6
o
b
O
u.' ^-,
Illl
^•^I-S
«" 0 JE
S«|
Qi e«
3^
693
META-ANALYTIC COMPARISON OF THE JDS AND JCI
1
1
11
II
'.o
?
V
g
5
"""" c
§
OP
•g
ill
c^ u -S
"S H. 2
w
c£3
'B
yi
s
O
&
1
W>
2
22
2
E
EE
I
<
<<
Z
Z Z
1
<
n
1
z
-a
•z
V
E
'C
£
<
Z
5
ii
<
"o
o
1
1
o
rt
^
.SP
< <
f o
ZZ
c3
~"
a
.s:
<
z
<
<
z
z
G
.2
c? E
Si
"i
f
js
O
~ "§
<
1
3"
1
d
5.
r-i
z
§
Z
II
*
UJ
1
g
f!
—•
-53
3
_w
I
1
LS not available
'^ 'g
1
S
1
Satisfaction (.
c c
o o
records
Satisfaction ( Alderfer,
If
Satisfaction (
performam
c
o
5
Satisfaction (,
'S
•n
U
|1
perform an<
records
<B
i§
e§
Satisfaction (
§S
1
i¥
>
1
c
_o
^
performa n<
records
§
^i
S
o
^^
r-
J3
*
s
ji 2
'*
ID
,5
E
o
"*1§ 1
< 00'^
PQ ^ (j
0
S
2
|
rt
z
= -a
•O
«
o
G
a S
3
*e
Si
o"
^
'S
u
|
tJS
'"§
^
<
'•6
S
<;
<
<
z
C
z
z"
Z
g'g
M
=
^ ^
12
°
*£
^ m
in
^o
^,
o
w
>
2
i 8 | S
1
ij ij
^ in
^ (N
•T
r-
'o
1
5
"to
u
Q
managerial
--'S*
2
l-a-S
.£
a)
§R
Is
g,
<£
z
.S.S
CA
V}
ji
u
3
"S
•c
a.
o
IS i> » .S " v
M
1
^
l
l
l
l
i
l
| X D.2 D.K
<
^
3
D-
s
a
2
>
E
CL.
o =
3 •£ a
g g |
c
g
c
>
o
O
"3
^r
U^
^
^"
S^
~
^
:L
5 •?
"^ ^
•J "B j>
D
S
CX
• «
S
=|
^
"
^0
1
-
1 so
g 4> C« (N u (io m r^
« O-
l- (O
u
S
•"
n "S.
u ^ —"S °^ o
"5.^" n S5 C *t;
E 2 rj o .2 §.
C
.1?
4J
' II
"
E e £ ™ "S-t-r
£ m <N
in
" T3
•a -S -g
™ c ^
> <u £
'€. § " *
'B^-g
^
^_
S3
b
|e
gl
«
-11
JDI = Ji
* Variety and (i
autonomy and
t|
._
w
NOK.
Keller, Szilagyi
Holland (191
Illslll
•g * °= =•&
s-^
on
(/5 vi
Griffin (1 982)
0V ^ C
^
^
*
iTT
oo
Brief & Aldag
(1978)
Griffin (1981)
^^•i ^i
[J ^J <u
3
£5
'fti
(1982)"
on
3
Wall, Clegg, &
Jackson (197
?
i
c"
M
_o
<U
o
atisfaction Questio
was not available i
a. (-
z
Professional &
c
11
Production &
technical
m
Professional
Ii
^
«
_
I
§§
S
Production
Job title and posii
c
o
'(5 —•
r.
694
YITZHAK FRIED
Table 2
Reliability Information of Measures
Variable
Range of r
Median r
.20-.91'
.64-.97b
.31-.90
.77-.99
.35-.90
.S6-.99
J6-.94
.61 -.98
.69-.9S
.7S-.96
.69 (.79)
.82
.69 (.75)
.89
.69 (.82)
.84
.70 (.80)
.86
.86
.85
Skill variety
Task identity
Autonomy
Job feedback
Work satisfaction
Job performance
Variance of r
.020
.009
.014
.004
.011
.018
.023
.011
.005
.005
No. of samples
46
15
47
15
48
15
46
15
31
7
Note. Numbers within parentheses represent the reliability estimates of the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS)
scales adjusted for the number of items of their respective Job Characteristics Inventory (JCI) scale. These
estimates are based on the Spearman-Brown formula.
a
JDS measure. b JCI measure.
scale correlated higher with performance relative to the JDS
variety scale (the estimated population correlations were .21
and .09, respectively). Moreover, true variance was not detected
in the association between JDS variety and performance, but
was detected in the relation between JCI variety and this outcome.
A more substantial dissimilarity was found in the relations
between the alternative autonomy scales and work satisfaction.
Table 3
Information on Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) and Job Characteristics Inventory (JCI) Characteristics as Correlates of Work Outcomes
Job characteristics/
no. of samples
Total
sample size
Observed r
Corrected r
Observed
variance
Unexplained
variance
Unexplained
variance:observed
variance
90% confidence
interval for
corrected r
Work satisfaction
Variety
20"
9"
Identity
11,356
1,672
.45
.54
.67
.70
.0067
.009
.000
.000
20
9
11,426
1,672
.25
.29
.32
.39
.0036
.0217
.000
.00522
0.24
.30 = s r s . 3 3
.34 < r < .44
11,426
1,598
.50
.28
.71
.38
.0067
.027
.000
.01331
0.49
.69 s r < .72
.24 < r < .52
11,356
1,598
.40
.36
.56
.52
.0062
.0153
.000
.000
.65 < r < .69
.67 <:rs .74
Autonomy
20
7
Feedback
20
7-
.54sr<.58
.47=:rs .57
Work performance
Variety
8
4
Identity
8
4
Autonomy
8
4
Feedback
1,091
1,066
.06
.15
.09
.21
.0077
.0128
.00058
.00823
1,091
1,066
.10
.12
.13
.17
.0074
.0033
.000
.000
1,091
1,066
.14
.15
.18
.21
.0182
.0154
.01974
.01121
1.08C
0.73
.08 <. r s .30
.07 <; r < .35
1,091
1.066
.15
.13
.22
.19
.0107
.0279
.00511
.04603
0.48
1.65C
.13 < ; r < .30
-.02 ^ r ^ .39
0.08
0.64
.08
;.34
.07 < / • :.19
.10 < r
Note. Observed r is the average correlation of sample correlations weighted for sample size. Corrected r is the average weighted correlation
corrected for measurement error of the predictor and criterion and range variation. Observed variance indicates the variance for r. Unexplained
variance is the variance remaining after correction for sampling error, measurement error of the predictor and criterion, and range variation. A
ratio of unexplained variance to observed variance is meaningful when greater than 0.25.
• Results for JDS. " Results for JCI. c Because the corrections of the observed variance resulting from error measurement and range variation
magnified the already relatively large discrepancies among the absolute values of the correlation coefficients, the unexplained variance became
greater than the observed variance (see also Fried & Ferris, 1987).
META-ANALYTIC COMPARISON OF THE JDS AND JCI
That is, the estimated population correlation between JDS autonomy and satisfaction (.71) was substantially higher than the
estimated correlation of JCI autonomy and this outcome (.38).
The difference between the two correlations is .33. Moreover,
although JDS autonomy had the highest relation with work
satisfaction among the JDS scales, JCI autonomy had the lowest relation with this outcome among the JCI scales. In addition, although true variance was not detected in the association
between JDS autonomy and satisfaction, it was detected in the
relation between JCI autonomy and this outcome.
This lack of convergence in the results between the correlations of the alternative autonomy scales and satisfaction may
suggest problems with the construct validity of either one or
possibly both of these scales. This interpretation is supported
by the content analysis of Pierce et al. (1986), who concluded
that the autonomy scales of both the JDS and JCI are the most
problematic among the job-characteristic scales, and that the
items of these scales should be carefully reexamined. Breaugh
(1985) suggested that one of the problems with the JDS and JCI
autonomy scales is that they are too global in nature and hence
susceptible to idiosyncratic interpretation. Developing multiple scales to assess conceptually different facets of autonomy
might be essential to enhance the consistency and validity of
information regarding both the level and influence of work
autonomy (Breaugh, 1985).
The unexplained variance in the correlations between job
characteristics and performance in the meta-analysis might be
a function of the relatively low number of studies and participants involved in the analysis. Alternatively, this unexplained
variance might be attributable to contextual factors in the
workplace (see e.g., Fried & Ferris, 1987) or possibly the multiple
methods used by the studies to assess performance or both.
However, the limited number of studies providing correlations
between job characteristics and performance precluded followup analyses of potential moderators.
Another limitation of the present study is that the presence of
similar associations between alternative measures of a job characteristic and an outcome is a necessary but not sufficient condition for demonstrating convergent validity. For example, the
magnitudes of the positive correlations between the alternative
scales of a focal job characteristic and work satisfaction might
reflect, at least in part, measurement artifacts often arising
from the use of self-report instruments. Clearly, there is a need
to explore this issue of convergent validity directly using more
sophisticated methods such as the multitrait, multimethod approach. Future studies should also attempt to explore thoroughly potential underlying sources of the differences in the
relations of the alternative job-characteristics scales with outcomes. Such research would enhance knowledge on the psychometric properties of the current scales as well as provide directions for improving these properties.
In summation, with these caveats in mind, the results of this
study provide additional support for the construct validity of
the alternative task-identity and job-feedback scales. Therefore,
researchers and practioners can be more confident that the alternative scales measure the same construct and hence are interchangeable. However, there was less compelling evidence for
the construct validity of the alternative measures of skill variety
and autonomy. Consequently, until future studies have established the psychometric similarities of the alternative measures
695
of skill variety and autonomy, researchers and practitioners
should not assume that alternative scales of these job dimensions can substitute for one another. An implication of this
warning is that one should be cautious of the conclusions
reached in several previous narrative and meta-analytic reviews
in the job-design area (see Fried & Ferris, 1987, for a review)
that have relied on alternative measures of the core job characteristics under the implicit assumption that the alternative measures are interchangeable.
References
Aldag, R. J., Barr, S. H., & Brief, A. P. (1981). Measurement of perceived task characteristics. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 415-431.
Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Existence, relatedness and growth. New York:
Free Press.
Arnold, H. J., & House, R. J. (1980). Methodological and substantive
extensions to the job characteristics model of motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25,161-183.
Breaugh, J. A. (1985). The measurement of work autonomy. Human
Relations, 35,551-570.
Brief, A. P., & Aldag, R. J. (1976). Correlates of role indices. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 61, 468-472.
Brief, A. P., & Aldag, R. J. (1978). The Job Characteristics Inventory:
An examination. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 659-670.
Caldwell, D. F., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1982). Task perceptions and job
satisfaction: A question of causality. Journal of Applied Psychology,
67,361-369.
Dunham, R. B. (1977). Reactions to job characteristics: Moderating
effects of the organization. Academy of Management Journal, 20,
42-65.
Evans, M. G., Kiggundu, M. N, & House, R. J. (1979). A partial test
and extension of the job characteristics model of motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 354-381.
Farh, J. L., & Scott, W E. (1983). The experimental effects of "autonomy" on performance and self-reports of satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 31, 203-222.
Fried, Y, & Ferris, G. R. (1986). The dimensionality of job characteristics: Some neglected issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 419426.
Fried, Y, & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristics
model: A review and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287322.
Griffin, R. W (1981). A longitudinal investigation of task characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 99-113.
Griffin, R. W (1982). Perceived task characteristics and employee productivity and satisfaction. Human Relations, 35, 927-938.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job
Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.
Helphingstine, S. R., Head, T. C, & Sorensen, P. F. (1981). Job characteristics, job satisfaction, motivation and satisfaction with growth: A
study of industrial engineers. Psychological Reports, 49, 381-382.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Jackson, G. B. (1982). Meta-analysis:
Cumulating research findings across studies. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications.
Katz, R. (1978). The influence of job longevity on employees' reactions
to task characteristics. Human Relations, 31, 703-725.
Keller, R. T., Szilagyi, A. D., & Holland, W E. (1975). Job characteristics of research and development personnel: Relationships with satisfaction and role variables. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 35, 490-492.
696
YITZHAK FRIED
Kiggundu, M. D. (1980). An empirical test of the theory of job design
using multiple job ratings. Human Relations, 33, 339-351.
Lawler, E. E., & Hall, D. T. (1970). Relationships of job characteristics
to job involvement, satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 54, 305-312.
Miller, G. A. (1967). Professionals in bureaucracy: Alienation among
industrial scientists and engineers. American Sociological Review,
32, 755-768.
Oldham, G. R., & Brass, D. J. (1979). Employee reactions to an openplan office: A naturally occurring quasi-experiment. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 24, 267-284.
Oldham, G. R., Hackman, J. R., & Stepina, L. P. (1979). Norms for the
Job Diagnostic Model. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 9, 14.
Oldham, G. R., & Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Relationships between office characteristics and employee reactions: A study of the physical
environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 542-556.
O'Reilly, C. A., & Caldwell, D. E (1979). Informational influence as a
determinant of perceived task characteristics and job satisfaction.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 64,157-165.
O'Reilly, C. A, Parlette, G. N., & Bloom, J. R. (1980). Perceptual measures of task characteristics: The biasing effects of differing frames
of reference and job attitudes. Academy of Management Journal, 23,
118-131.
Orpen, C. (1979). The effects of job enrichment on employee satisfaction, motivation, involvement, and performance: A field experiment. Human Relations, 32, 189-217.
Pearlman, K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1980). Validity generalization results for tests used to predict job proficiency and training
success in clerical occupations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65,
373-406.
Pierce, J. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1978). The measurement of perceived
job characteristics: The Job Diagnostic Survey versus the Job Characteristics Inventory. Academy of Management Journal, 21,123-128.
Pierce, J. L., McTavish, D. G., Knudson, K. R. (1986). The measurement of job characteristics: A context and contextual analytic look at
scale validity. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 17, 299-313.
Rousseau, D. M. (1977). Technological differences in job characteristics, employee satisfaction, and motivation: A synthesis of job design
research and socio-technical systems theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 19,18-42.
Schmitt, N., Coyle, B. W, Rauschenberger, J., & White, J. K. (1979).
Comparison of early retirees and nonretirees. Personnel Psychology,
32, 327-340.
Schmitt, N., Coyle, B. W, White, J. K., & Rauschenberger, J. (1978).
Background, needs, job perceptions, and job satisfaction: A causal
model. Personnel Psychology, 32, 327-340.
Scott, W E. (1967), The development of semantic differential scales as
measures of "morale." Personnel Psychology, 20, 179-198.
Seybolt, J. W (1980). The impact of work role design on the career
satisfaction of registered nurses. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 40, 42-46.
Sims, H. P., & Szilagyi, A. D. (1976). Job characteristics relationships:
Individual and structural moderators. Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, 17,211-230.
Sims, H. P., Szilagyi, A. D, & Keller, R. T. (1976). The measurement of
job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 195-212.
Smith, F. J. (1976). Index of organizational reactions (IOR). JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 6. (Ms. No. 1265)
Smith, P. C., Kendall, C. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of
satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Snyder, S., Head, T. C., & Sorensen, P. F. (1982). Job redesign: A study of
the role of context variables and growth needs. Psychological Reports, 50, 33-38.
Wall, T. D, Clegg, C. W, & Jackson, P. R. (1978). An evaluation of the
Job Characteristics Model. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2,3149.
Weiss, D. J., Davis, R. V, England, G. W, & Lofquist, L. H. (1967).
Minnesota studies in vocational rehabilitation: Manual of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
META-ANALYTIC COMPARISON OF THE JDS AND JCI
697
Appendix
Studies That Provided Correlations of the JDS or JCI Scales With Work Satisfaction and Performance*1
Arnold, H. J., & House, R. J. (1980). Methodological and substantive
extensions to the job characteristics model of motivation. Organization Behavior and Human Performance, 25,161-183.
Brief, A. P., & Aldag, R. J. (1976). Correlates of role indices. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 61, 468-472.
Brief, A. P., & Aldag, R. J. (1978). The Job Characteristics Inventory:
An examination. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 659-670.
Caldwell, D. E, & O'Reilly, C. A. (1982). Task perceptions and job
satisfaction: A question of causality. Journal of Applied Psychology,
67,361-369.
Dunham, R. B. (1977). Reactions to job characteristics: Moderating
effects of the organization. Academy of Management Journal, 20,
42-65.
Evans, M. G., Kiggundu, M. K, & House, R. J. (1979). A partial test
and extension of the job characteristics model of motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 354-381.
Farh, J. L., & Scott, W E. (1983). The experimental effects of "autonomy" on performance and self-reports of satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 31, 203-222.
Griffin, R. W (1981). A longitudinal investigation of task characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 99-113.
Griffin, R. W (1982). Perceived task characteristics and employee productivity and satisfaction. Human Relations, 35, 927-938.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job
Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.
Helphingstine, S. R., Head, T. C., & Sorensen, R. F. (1981). Job characteristics, job satisfaction, motivation and satisfaction with growth: A
study of industrial engineers. Psychological Reports, 49, 381-382.
Katz, R. (1978). The influence of job longevity on employees' reactions
to task characteristics. Human Relations, 31, 703-725.
Keller, R. T, Szilagyi, A. D., & Holland, W E. (1975). Job characteristics of research and development personnel: Relationships with satisfaction and role variables. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 35, 490-492.
Kiggundu, M. D. (1980). An empirical test of the theory of job design
using multiple job ratings. Human Relations, 33, 339-351.
Oldham, G. R., & Brass, D. J. (1979). Employee reactions to an openplan office: A naturally occurring quasi-experiment. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 24, 267-284.
Oldham, G. R., Hackman, J. R., & Stepina, L. P. (1979). Norms for the
Job Diagnostic Model. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 9,14.
Oldham, G. R., & Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Relationships between office characteristics and employee reactions: A study of the physical
environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 542-556.
O'Reilly, C. A., & Caldwell, D. F. (1979). Informational influence as a
determinant of perceived task characteristics and job satisfaction.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 64,157-165.
O'Reilly, C. A., Parlette, G. N., & Bloom, J. R. (1980). Perceptual measures of task characteristics: The biasing effects of differing frames
of reference and job attitudes. Academy of Management Journal, 23,
118-131.
Orpen, C. (1979). The effects of job enrichment on employee satisfaction, motivation, involvement, and performance: A field experiment. Human Relations, 32,189-217.
Rousseau, D. M. (1977). Technological differences in job characteristics, employee satisfaction, and motivation: A synthesis of job design
research and socio-technical systems theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 19, 18-42.
Schmitt, N., Coyle, B. W, Rauschenberger, J., & White, J. K. (1979).
Comparison of early retirees and nonretirees. Personnel Psychology,
32, 327-340.
Schmitt, N., Coyle, B. W, White, J. K., & Rauschenberger, J. (1978).
Background, needs, job perceptions, and job satisfaction: A causal
model. Personnel Psychology, 32, 327-340.
Seybolt, J. W (1980). The impact of work role design on the career
satisfaction of registered nurses. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 40, 42-46.
Sims, H. P., & Szilagyi, A. D. (1976). Job characteristics relationships:
Individual and structural moderators. Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, 77, 211-230.
Snyder, S., Head, T. C., & Sorensen, P. F. (1982). Job redesign: A study of
the role of context variables and growth needs. Psychological Reports, 50, 33-38.
Wall, T. D, Clegg, C. W, & Jackson, P. R. (1978). An evaluation of the
Job Characteristics Model. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 3149.
Al
A list of studies that provided information on reliabilities and
standard deviations, which were used in the meta-analysis, is available
on request.
Received May 30,1989
Revision received March 15,1991
Accepted April 5,1991 •