Individual differences and task design: A laboratory experiment

Abstract A laboratory experiment was conducted to test the moderating effects of Protestant Ethic, Growth Need Strength, Need for Achievement, and Arousal-Seeking Tendency on task design relationships. Objective task scope was manipulated by assigning 190 college students to either a simple or complex electronic assembly task. While none of the individual differences variables significantly moderated the objective scope—satisfaction relationship, need for achievement did moderate the perceived scope—satisfaction relationship. Upon inspection of the interaction terms, however, it was found that the moderating effects were contrary to those hypothesized. Implications for both theory development and the practice of job redesign are discussed.

[1]  D. Berlyne,et al.  Uncertainty and the orientation reaction , 1968 .

[2]  Donald P. Schwab,et al.  A Theoretical Analysis of the Impact of Task Scope on Employee Performance , 1976 .

[3]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[4]  M. Zuckerman,et al.  Sensation seeking and volunteering for sensory deprivation and hypnosis experiments. , 1967, Journal of consulting psychology.

[5]  John P. Wanous,et al.  Individual differences and reactions to job characteristics. , 1974 .

[6]  H. P. Sims,et al.  Job characteristic relationships: individual and structural moderators. , 1976, Organizational behavior and human performance.

[7]  H. Day,et al.  The importance of symmetry and complexity in the evaluation of complexity, interest and pleasingness , 1968 .

[8]  C. Hulin,et al.  Job enlargement, individual differences, and worker responses. , 1968 .

[9]  H. L. Minton.  A REPLICATION OF PERCEPTUAL CURIOSITY AS A FUNCTION OF STIMULUS COMPLEXITY. , 1963, Journal of experimental psychology.

[10]  D. Berlyne,et al.  The semantic differential and other measures of reaction to visual complexity. , 1966, Canadian journal of psychology.

[11]  H. Mirels,et al.  The Protestant ethic as a personality variable. , 1971, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[12]  Arthur N. Turner,et al.  Industrial Jobs and the Worker: An Investigation of Response to Task Attributes by Arthur N. Turner and Paul R. Lawrence (review) , 1965 .

[13]  J. Hackman,et al.  Employee reactions to job characteristics. , 1971 .

[14]  J. Lewis,et al.  NOVELTY, COMPLEXITY, INCONGRUITY, EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION, AND THE GSR. , 1963, Journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  A. Jones.  DRIVE AND INCENTIVE VARIABLES ASSOCIATED WITH THE STATISTICAL PROPERTIES OF SEQUENCES OF STIMULI. , 1964, Journal of experimental psychology.

[16]  A. Maslow.  Motivation and Personality , 1954 .

[17]  M. Blood,et al.  Work values and job satisfaction. , 1969 .

[18]  W. E. Scott.  Activation theory and task design , 1966 .

[19]  Greg R. Oldham,et al.  Job Characteristics and Internal Motivation: The Moderating Effect of Interpersonal and Individual Variables , 1976 .

[20]  R. Franken,et al.  Effects of stimulus size, brightness and complexity upon EEG desynchronization , 1967 .

[21]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes. , 1977 .

[22]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Task design, work values, and worker response: An experimental test , 1974 .

[23]  Charles A. O'Reilly,et al.  Informational influence as a determinant of perceived task characteristics and job satisfaction. , 1979 .

[24]  Eugene F. Stone,et al.  Higher order need strengths as moderators of the job scope-job satisfaction relationship. , 1977 .

[25]  H. Day,et al.  Looking Time as a Function of Stimulus Variables and Individual Differences , 1966 .

[26]  C. Alderfer,et al.  A Critique of Salancik and Pfeffer's Examination of Need-Satisfaction Theories , 1977 .

[27]  D. Jackson.  Personality research form manual , 1974 .

[28]  J. Hackman,et al.  Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey , 1975 .

[29]  Richard,et al.  Motivation through the Design of Work: Test of a Theory. , 1976 .

[30]  Ramon J. Aldag,et al.  Examination of a Measure of Higher-Order Need Strength , 1979 .

[31]  F. Friedlander,et al.  Comparative Work Value Systems , 1965 .

[32]  C. Alderfer.  An empirical test of a new theory of human needs , 1969 .

[33]  H. P. Sims,et al.  The Measurement of Job Characteristics , 1976 .

[34]  J. Hackman,et al.  Conditions under which employees respond positively to enriched work , 1976 .

[35]  Eugene F. Stone.  The moderating effect of work-related values on the job scope-job satisfaction relationship☆☆☆ , 1976 .

[36]  Theodore Kunin.  The Construction of a New Type of Attitude Measure , 1955 .

[37]  Ramon J. Aldag,et al.  Employee Reactions to Job Characteristics: A Constructive Replication , 1975 .

[38]  Eugene F. Stone.  Job scope, job satisfaction, and the Protestant Ethic: A study of enlisted men in the U.S. Navy , 1974 .

[39]  Douglas T. Hall,et al.  Job Scope And Individual Differences As Predictors Of Job Involvement: Independent Or Interactive? , 1977 .

[40]  D. Berlyne,et al.  EFFECTS OF STIMULUS COMPLEXITY AND INCONGRUITY ON DURATION OF EEG DESYNCHRONIZATION. , 1965, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[41]  Richard M. Steers,et al.  The Role of Achievement Motivation in Job Design. , 1977 .

[42]  J. Russell,et al.  An approach to environmental psychology , 1974 .