Decent work is positioned as the centerpiece of the recently developed Psychology of Working Theory (PWT; Duffy, Blustein, Diemer, & Autin, 2016). However, to date, no instrument exists which assesses all 5 components of decent work from a psychological perspective. In the current study, we developed the Decent Work Scale (DWS) and demonstrated several aspects of validity with 2 samples of working adults. In Study 1 (N = 275), a large pool of items were developed and exploratory factor analysis was conducted resulting in a final 15-item scale with 5 factors/subscales corresponding to the 5 components of decent work: (a) physically and interpersonally safe working conditions, (b) access to health care, (c) adequate compensation, (d) hours that allow for free time and rest, and (e) organizational values that complement family and social values. In Study 2 (N = 589), confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that a 5-factor, bifactor model offered the strongest and most parsimonious fit to the data. Configural, metric, and scalar invariance models were tested demonstrating that the structure of the instrument did not differ across gender, income, social class, and majority/minority racial/ethnic groups. Finally, the overall scale score and 5 subscale scores correlated in the expected directions with similar constructs supporting convergent and discriminant evidence of validity, and subscale scores evidenced predictive validity in the prediction of job satisfaction, work meaning, and withdrawal intentions. The development of this scale provides a useful tool for researchers and practitioners seeking to assess the attainment of decent work among employed adults. (PsycINFO Database Record
Using job characteristics theory as a framework, we calculated meta‐analytic effect sizes between meaningful work and various outcomes and tested a mediated model of meaningful work predicting proximal and distal outcomes with meta‐analytic structural equation modelling (MASEM). From 44 articles (N = 23,144), we found that meaningful work had large correlations (r = 0.70+) with work engagement, commitment, and job satisfaction; moderate to large correlations (r = 0.44 to −0.49) with life satisfaction, life meaning, general health, and withdrawal intentions; and small to moderate correlations (r = −0.19 to 0.33) with organizational citizenship behaviours, self‐rated job performance, and negative affect. The best MASEM fitting model was meaningful work predicting work engagement, commitment, and job satisfaction and these variables subsequently predicting self‐rated performance, organizational citizenship behaviours, and withdrawal intentions. This meta‐analysis provides estimated effect sizes between meaningful work and its outcomes and reveals how meaningful work relates directly and indirectly to key outcomes.
The current study examined the relation between perceiving a calling, living a calling, and job satisfaction among a diverse group of employed adults who completed an online survey (N = 201). Perceiving a calling and living a calling were positively correlated with career commitment, work meaning, and job satisfaction. Living a calling moderated the relations of perceiving a calling with career commitment and work meaning, such that these relations were more robust for those with a stronger sense they were living their calling. Additionally, a moderated, multiple mediator model was run to examine the mediating role of career commitment and work meaning in the relation of perceiving a calling and job satisfaction, while accounting for the moderating role of living a calling. Results indicated that work meaning and career commitment fully mediated the relation between perceiving a calling and job satisfaction. However, the indirect effects of work meaning and career commitment were only significant for individuals with high levels of living a calling, indicating the importance of living a calling in the link between perceiving a calling and job satisfaction. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.