Does perception of pay equity, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction mediate the effect of positive affectivity on work motivation?
Main Article Content
The mediating effect of positive affectivity on work motivation by three attitudinal variables (perception of pay equity, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction) was investigated in this study. The results indicated that positive affectivity had a positive effect on work motivation. Among the 3 attitudinal variables, pay satisfaction and job satisfaction were found to mediate the effect of positive affectivity on work motivation.
Various researchers have found it useful to use dispositional traits to predict work-related attitudes and behaviors. Positive affectivity (PA) is defined as a person’s disposition to experience positive mood states and have an overall sense of well-being (George & Jones, 1997). Individuals with high PA react to environmental conditions and themselves with a generalized positive cognitive set which produces a positive interpretation of a wide range of phenomena (Clark & Watson, 1991). In contrast, individuals with low PA are more prone to nonpleasurable disengagement, and have lower self-efficacy, as well as a weaker sense of overall well-being (George, 1991). This dispositional trait is assumed to be relatively stable across diverse situations, and explain why people act in predictable ways in many different settings (Berstein, Clarke-Stewart, Roy, Srull, & Wickens, 1994).
The Current Study
In this study the relationship between PA and work motivation is investigated in relation to the mediating effects of three attitudinal variables, pay equity, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction. It is argued that PA influences processes which are fundamental to human metacognitive functioning, and plays an important role in affecting how people interact with many life events (Isen & Baron, 1991). In fact, in a number of studies a relationship has been confirmed between dispositional traits and various job attitudes, such as job satisfaction, work stress, turnover intentions, and organizational commitment (see Chiu & Kosinski, 1997; George & Jones, 1997; Munz, Huelsman, Konold, & McKinney, 1996). Among them, however, no study exploring the relationship between PA and work motivation has been carried out (Hochwarter, Stepina, & Perrewe, 1996). The objectives in this study were to investigate the function of PA as a predictor of the level of work motivation, and the effect of attitudinal variables, including perception of pay equity, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction, as mediating variables of the relationship between PA and work motivation.
Positive Affectivity And Work Motivation
Human motivation is a function of one’s personality and environment – and some argue that differences in one’s disposition might be significant in explaining the work motivation of individuals (Cropanzano, James, & Konovsky, 1993). Munz et al. (1996) found a significant relationship between negative affectivity and work motivation. In another study, Aryee, Chay, and Chew (1996) found that Singaporean managers’ motivation (to mentor) was predicted by individual characteristics such as altruism and PA. Therefore, it was assumed that:
H1: PA will be positively related to work motivation.
Mediating Effects on the Relationship Between PA and Work Motivation
Three attitudinal variables were hypothesized to mediate the effects of PA on work motivation: perceptions of pay equity, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction. Within the expectancy theory framework, the amount of effort which an individual exerts to perform a particular behavior is influenced by perceptions of reward equity and satisfaction (Porter & Lawler, 1968). Therefore, it seems reasonable to test whether these variables may mediate the effect of PA on work motivation.
According to equity theory, a perceived unfavorable imbalance in pay between self and others could lead to decreased pay satisfaction. Since positive or negative affect has been found to exert influences on one’s evaluation of ambiguous situations and materials (Isen & Baron, 1991), feelings of equity or inequity could be related to dispositional affectivity. This argument is supported by two research findings. Isen and Baron (1991) found that individuals who perceived they were being treated unfairly would react in predictable ways – with unhappiness, anger, and annoyance. In another study Hochwarter, Stepina, and Perrewe (1996) indicated that dispositional affectivity significantly related to the perception of pay equity. On the other hand, from the perspective of equity theory, pay has a potentially great impact on work motivation. For example, Carr, McLoughlin, Hodgson, and MacLachlan (1996) found that their participants exhibited significantly reduced intrinsic motivation when they knew they were being inequitably paid. In this study, it was speculated that the influence of PA on work motivation was by means of pay equity. Thus, the following hypothesis was proposed:
H2: Pay equity will mediate the effect of PA on work motivation.
There has not been much research conducted to investigate the relationship between dispositions and pay satisfaction. Pay satisfaction is the amount of overall positive or negative affect which individuals have towards their pay. Since affect is an important element in the assessment of work-related satisfaction, and pay satisfaction is a facet of job satisfaction, then pay satisfaction could be affected by dispositions, like PA. It is also a commonly-held belief that pay is one of the most positively valent work variables for most people (Ribeaux & Poppleto, 1978) since it can be used to obtain a variety of desired variables. Employees dissatisfied with pay and their jobs would initiate turnover or absenteeism behaviors. Orpen and Bonnici (1990) found that work motivation was significantly and positively related to pay satisfaction. Therefore, it is reasonable to speculate that the influence which dispositions have on work motivation could be manifested through pay satisfaction such that PA could influence the level of pay satisfaction and that, in turn, would affect the level of work motivation. Thus, the following hypothesis was suggested:
H3: Pay satisfaction will mediate the effect of PA on work motivation.
Numerous researchers (e.g. Chiu & Kosinski, 1997; Cropanzano et al., 1993; Necowitz & Roznowski, 1994) have found a relationship between dispositional affectivity and job satisfaction. In general, PA was positively related to job satisfaction. George (1992) even suggested that PA was likely to be the dispositional underpinning of job satisfaction. Although the precise relationship between job satisfaction and performance is not clear (Steers, Porter, & Bigley, 1996), there is some evidence that job satisfaction is related to organizational citizenship behavior (Organ, 1988). As mentioned earlier, Porter and Lawler (1968) suggested that job satisfaction was an important component which generated elements of motivation. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that dispositions influence work motivation through job satisfaction, and that PA could influence one’s level of job satisfaction – which would then affect the level of work motivation. Thus, it was hypothesized that:
H4: Job satisfaction will mediate the effect of PA on work motivation.
Method
Sample
Questionnaires were distributed to 500 Hong Kong managers attending various training courses held by a local professional body over a period of six months. Each prospective participant was given a questionnaire packet including a covering letter explaining the purpose of the study and requesting participation, the questionnaire, and a stamped return envelope.
Instrumentation
Positive affectivity (PA) was measured by an 11-item version of the Multidimensional Personality Index used by Watson, Clark, and Carey (1988). A sample PA item is “It is easy for me to become enthusiastic about things I am doing”. The established alpha reliability was .83. Work motivation (WM) was measured by using a 6-item index developed by Oliver and Weitz (1991). An example of an item is “I wish there were more hours in the week to work”. The established alpha reliability of this scale was .75. Perception of pay equity (PE) was assessed using five revised items from a 9-item instrument by Summers and DeNisi (1990). The alpha reliability as reported was .87. Pay satisfaction (PS) was measured by eight items selected from the Pay Satisfaction Questionnaire developed by Heneman and Schwab (1985). The previously reported reliability coefficient was .89. Job satisfaction (JS) was measured using a 6-item index used by Agho, Price, and Muller (1992). Cronbach’s alpha was .90
Analysis
Zero-order correlation and hierarchical multiple regression analysis were used to test the established hypotheses. The relationships between any two variables of interest were tested by using zero-order correlation analysis. In the hierarchical regression, control variables were entered into the regression equation in the first step; the dependent variable of work motivation was regressed on PA in the second step. The mediating variable(s) were entered into the equation in the following step.
To support the mediational hypotheses required the following conditions: (1) variations in levels of the independent variable significantly accounted for variations in the mediators; (2) variations in the mediators significantly accounted for variations in the dependent variable, and; (3) if the previous conditions all hold as speculated, then the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable must be reduced when the mediators are introduced into the equations (Baron & Kenny, 1986).
Results
One hundred and eighty-four valid questionnaires were returned by mail, giving a response rate of 36.8%. Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, alpha reliability coefficients, and intercorrelations among the study variables. The Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities ranged from .75 to .92. Hypothesis 1 was supported since the results of both zero order correlation and hierarchical regression analyses indicated that there was a positive relationship between PA and work motivation (see Tables 1 and 2).
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, Alpha Reliability, and Zero-Order Correlations FF Study Variables (N = 184)
* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
NA = Negative affectivity, PA = Positive affectivity, WM = Work motivation, JS = Job satisfaction, PS = Pay satisfaction, PE = Pay equity.
The mediational hypotheses were tested using the Baron and Kenny (1986) procedure outlined above. The first condition was satisfied as PA accounted for variations in the mediators of pay equity (β = .224, p < .01), pay satisfaction (β = .285, p < .01), and job satisfaction (β = .422, p < .01). To fulfill the second condition, the three mediating variables should significantly account for variations in work motivation. However, this was true only for pay satisfaction (β = .128, p < 0.05) and job satisfaction (β = .225, p < 0.01, respectively). As the previous two conditions held in the predicted direction, to support the mediational hypotheses, it should be demonstrated that the effect of PA on work motivation was reduced when all three mediating variables were introduced into the equation. In fact, the relationship between PA and work motivation was reduced (β = .114, p = ns) after all three mediating variables were placed in the equation. Hypotheses 3 and 4 concerning pay and job satisfactions, were supported in this study (Table 2). PA and the mediating variables accounted for 11.8% of the variance in work motivation.
Table 2. Results of Hierarchically Regressing Work Motivation on the Predictor (PA) and Mediating Variables (N = 184)
Betas are standardized.
* p < .05, ** p < .01
Discussion
The contribution of the current study was to ascertain the effects of PA on work motivation and the mediating effects of perception of pay equity, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction on this relationship. Although many researchers have confirmed the effects of dispositions on a number of work-related variables and job attitudes, especially job satisfaction, only one study carried out by Munz et al. (1996), supported the relationship between negative affectivity and work motivation, and another by Hochwarter et al. (1996) confirmed the PA – pay equity relationship. No previous study had been conducted to investigate the effect of PA on pay satisfaction – and none of the previous studies was in the Chinese context.
Hypothesis 1 tested the effects of PA on work motivation. According to the results, there was a positive relationship between PA and work motivation. Even though the magnitude of the coefficient was not great, it was statistically significant and fell in the assumed direction. These results suggest that PA has small, but significant effects on levels of work motivation. The weak relationship between PA and work motivation could be because (1) disposition is one of many factors, such as work contents and context, human relations, and expectancy of outcomes, which affect work motivation (Steers & Porter, 1991); (2) the effects of PA on work motivation could be manifested through other personal and situational variables which mediate such a relationship (Necowitz & Roznowski, 1994); and/or (3) individual perception has historically been treated more as a source of error variance than as an important causal factor (Staw, Bell, & Clausen, 1986). In short, when PA is at work, they have to work through other factors and have only indirect effects on work motivation.
Pay and job satisfactions were historically used as predictors of employees’ work motivation, and the results of this study support this position. Both pay satisfaction and job satisfaction played an important role in explaining the variance in employees’ work motivation, and mediating the relationship between PA and work motivation. Hypotheses 3 and 4 were supported; but Hypothesis 2 was not. These results are not surprising since it has been established that PA would affect work motivation only through other work-related outcomes. This implies that: (1) employees with positive attitudes to life would still have to be satisfied with their pay and jobs before they became willing and likely to put more effort into work; and (2) PA individuals tend to report positive experience with pay and job related issues, and are more motivated as a result of having such satisfactions met. On the other hand, pay equity did not have a significant effect on mediating the PA-work motivation relationship – perhaps because: (1) pay equity was not a significant predictor of work motivation to begin with; (2) a majority of the shared variance was attributed to pay satisfaction rather than pay equity since these two variables were highly intercorrelated; and (3) PA individuals, with a positive attitude towards problem-solving, when perceiving pay inequity, would be self-motivated to work even harder to impress their bosses in order to rectify or improve their present pay level.
Agho, A. O., Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1992). Discrimination validity of measures of job satisfaction, positive affectivity and negative affectivity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65, 185-196.
Aryee, S., Chay, Y. W., & Chew, J. (1996). The motivation to mentor among managerial employees. Group & Organization Management, 21(3), 261-277.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Berstein, D. A., Clarke-Stewart, A., Roy, E. J., Srull, T. K., & Wickens, C. D. (1994). Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Carr, S. C., McLoughlin, D., Hodgson, M., & LacLachlan, M. (1996). Effects of unreasonable pay discrepancies for under- and overpayment on double demotivation. Generic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 122(4), 475-494.
Chiu, R. K., & Kosinski, F. A., Jr. (1997). Relationships between dispositional traits and self-reported job satisfaction and distress: An investigation of nurses and teachers in Hong Kong. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 12(2), 71-84.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991). General affective dispositions in physical and psychological health. In C. R. Snyder & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.) Handbook of social and clinical psychology (pp. 221-245). New York: Pergamon Press.
Cropanzano, R., James, K., & Konovsky, M. A. (1993). Dispositional affectivity as a predictor of work attitudes and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 595-606.
George, J. M. (1992). The role of personality in organizational life: Issues and evidence. Journal of Management, 18(2), 185-213.
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (1997). Experiencing work: Values, attitudes, and moods. Human Relations, 50, 393-416.
Heneman, J., & Schwab, D. P. (1985). Pay satisfaction: Its multidimensional nature and measurement. International Journal of Psychology, 20, 129-141.
Hochwarter, W. A., Stepina, L. P. & Perrewe, P. L. (1996). Always getting the short end of the stick: The effects of negative affectivity on perceptions of equity. Journal of Management Issues, 8(4), 457-469.
Isen, A. M., & Baron, R. A. (1991). Positive affect as a factor in organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 1-53.
Munz, D. C., Huelsman, T. J., Konold, T. R., & McKinney, J. J. (1996). Are there methodological and substantive roles for affectivity in job diagnostic survey relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 795-805.
Necowitz, L. B., & Roznowski, M. (1994). Negative affectivity and job satisfaction: Cognitive processes underlying the relationship and effects on employee behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 270-294.
Oliver, R. L., & Weitz, B. A. (1991). The effect of risk preference, uncertainty, and incentive compensation on salesperson motivation. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Organ, D. W. (1988). A restatement of the satisfaction-performance hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14(4), 547-557.
Orpen, C., & Bonnici, J. (1990). The causes and consequences of pay satisfaction: A test of Lawler’s model. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 27(1), 27-29.
Porter, L., & Lawler, E., III. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, IL.: Irwin.
Ribeaux, R., & Poppleto, S. E. (1978). Psychology and work: An introduction. London: Macmillan.
Staw, B. M., Bell, N. E., & Clausen, J. A. (1986). The dispositional approach to job attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. Administrative Science Quarterly, Mar. 56-77.
Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1991). Motivation and work behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Steers, R. M., Porter, L. W., & Bigley, G. A. (1996). Motivation and leadership at work. (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Summers, T. P., & DeNisi, A. S. (1990). In research of Adams’ other: Reexamination of referents used in evaluation of pay. Human Relations, 43(6), 497-511.
Watson, D., Clark, L., & Carey, G. (1988). Positive and negative affectivity and their relation to anxiety and depressive disorders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 346-353.
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, Alpha Reliability, and Zero-Order Correlations FF Study Variables (N = 184)
* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
NA = Negative affectivity, PA = Positive affectivity, WM = Work motivation, JS = Job satisfaction, PS = Pay satisfaction, PE = Pay equity.
Table 2. Results of Hierarchically Regressing Work Motivation on the Predictor (PA) and Mediating Variables (N = 184)
Betas are standardized.
* p < .05, ** p < .01
Appreciation is due to anonymous reviewers.
Randy Chiu, Department of Management, School of Business, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon, Hong Kong.