This study examined the multiple relationships between job satisfaction, personality, and non-workrole behaviors. Non-work role behaviors are defined here as groups of positive and negative behaviors that influence organizational effectiveness but are not part of a formal job description or controlled by an organization's reward/performance evaluation system. In recent years, both job satisfaction and personality have received renewed research attention examining how they contribute to the explanation and prediction of traditional organizational criteria such as job performance and training success. This study used the five-factor model of personality (Digman, 1990), job satisfaction, and positive and negative affect to explain employees' non-workrole behaviors. Using a self-report siuvey. data were collected firom 313 employees in the health care industry. Two stage structural equation modeling was used to compare different theoretical models evaluating the contribution of job satisfaction. positive and negative affect, and alternate conceptualizations of personality to the prediction of non-workrole behaviors. The results suggest that job satisfaction, affective state, and personality contribute uniquely to the prediction of non-workrole behaviors. The results also suggest that criterion-related conceptualizations of personality are more successful in the prediction of non-workrole behaviors than more general conceptualizations of personality. In addition to these findings, support is also provided for the congruent measurement of general attimdes and general behaviors (i.e., behavioral families). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. I CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Industrial and organizational (I/O) psychology is largely occupied by the task of determining how differences between employees' attributes affect behavior at work. The complexity of human behavior makes this an extremely difficult task. Employees can differ on many dimensions; each dimension having different effects on their behavior. Common dimensions where differences exist include intelligence, work attitudes, and personality and they all have received significant research attention. These areas of research have, however, produced decidedly different results. The research on intelligence and cognitive ability has been highly successful. Fewwould argue with the conclusion that cognitive ability is probably the single best variable available if one is attempting to predict an applicant's future performance behavior. For example, in a large study involving military personnel, validity coefficients for general cognitive ability predicting general soldiering and technical proficiency were reported to be approximately .65 (McHenry, Hough, Toquam, Hanson, & Ashworth, 1990). Cognitive ability has also been shown to be a valid predictor of employee performance across nearly all jobs and situations (Hunter. 1986; Schmidt & Hunter, 1981). Research on the usefulness of attitudes and personality in predicting relevant employee behavior has not prod...

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter fece, while others may be from any type of computer printer.The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper aligrmient can adversely affect reproduction.In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.