Environmental and Genetic Components of Job Satisfaction

1. Environmental and Genetic Components of Job Satisfaction

2. Arvey et al.’s (1989) study • Stable individual differences in job satisfaction • Staw & Ross (1985) • Temperament could influence job attitudes by affecting the input, recall, and interpretation of information from work situations • Arvey et al. predict that genetic factors influence job attitudes (esp. for more intrinsic aspects of job satisfaction)

3. Method • 34 pairs of monozygotic (MZA) twins reared apart from an early age • Mean separation age = .45 years (SD = .79) • Mean age of reunion = 31.71 years (SD = 15.77) • Mean age at participation = 41.88 years (SD = 12.03) • Rationale: • MZA reared apart share the same genetic structure but not the same family environment • Thus, similarities should be due to genetics • Measures: • Minnesota Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (short form) • Responded based on the job that they considered to be “major” • Single-item measure of overall job satisfaction • DOT ratings of job characteristics • Used intraclass correlation for analyses

4. Findings • JS ICCs • ICC = .309 for MJSQ general satisfaction • ICC = .166 (n.s.) for 1-item JS measure • ICC = .315 for MJSQ intrinsic satisfaction • ICC = .109 for for MJSQ extrinsic satisfaction • Job conditions ICCs • ICC = .443 for complexity • ICC = .356 for motor skills • ICC = .338 for physical demands • ICC was n.s. for working conditions • Job conditions partialed from JS scores • ICC = .289 for MJSQ general satisfaction

5. Implications • “First, it appears that the organization may have somewhat less ‘control’ over job satisfaction than is commonly believed, particularly with respect to intrinsic satisfaction.” • “A second implication of this research is that prediction of future job satisfaction or dissatisfaction with a different job may be possible from knowledge of current satisfaction”

6. Reply by Cropanzano & James (1990) • Identify possible validity threats based on Cook and Campbell criteria: • Statistical conclusion validity • Appropriateness of interpretation of statistical results • Internal validity • Can causal statements be made? • External validity • Can results be generalized beyond the sample? • Construct validity • Appropriateness of inferences made from test scores to constructs of interest

7. Statistical Conclusion Validity Threats • Range restriction problem • If environment is identical, you would find large genetic effects • If environments are completely different and genetics are identical, you would find large environmental effects • Need to understand environments of MZA twins • MZA twins tend to be from poor families (before and after separation) • Distortions in correlations from genotype-environment correlations

8. Internal Validity Threats • Alternative conclusions: • Negative affect could relate to more extreme self-reports of JS • JS may result from genetic influences on height and attractiveness • Non-genetic causes of MZA similarity • Similar environments prior to separation • Similar post-separation environments • Similar appearance of twins

9. External Validity Threats • Sample similar to other MZAs? • MZA similar to everyone else? • womb differences between twins and singletons • MZA and SES and JS • more likely to be left-handed; emotional reactions related to right hemisphere

10. Construct Validity Threats • Arvey et al. assume that inherited JS is not malleable • Consistency of JS over time and jobs does not indicate that • Heritability estimates can change • .30 does not imply that only 70% variance in JS can change