Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis.
verifiedrich profile · Journal of Applied Psychology · 2001
Judge, Timothy A.; Bono, Joyce E.
How this was studied
A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.
What this article reports
The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.
self efficacy → job satisfaction
self efficacy → task performance
Models this article informs
The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.
self efficacy predicts job satisfaction
self efficacy predicts overall job performance
self efficacy predicts task performance
In the authors’ words
The article’s own abstract.
This article presents meta-analytic results of the relationship of 4 traits--self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability (low neuroticism) with job satisfaction and job performance. With respect to job satisfaction, the estimated true score correlations were .26 for self-esteem, .45 for generalized self-efficacy, .32 for internal locus of control, and .24 for emotional stability. With respect to job performance, the correlations were .26 for self-esteem, .23 for generalized self-efficacy, .22 for internal locus of control, and .19 for emotional stability. In total, the results based on 274 correlations suggest that these traits are among the best dispositional predictors of job satisfaction and job performance. T. A. Judge, E. A. Locke. and C. C. Durham's (1997) theory of core self-evaluations is used as a framework for discussing similarities between the 4 traits and their relationships to satisfaction and performance.
What the literature says about it
Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.
supports “This is in accordance with the expression of Judge, Bono and Locke (Judge and Bono 2001) that there is an indirect influence of self-efficacy on job satisfaction as part of self-evaluations ( core self-evaluations ) which can usually be through job characteristic variables ( perceived job characteristics ) or through job complexity .”
supports “This is in accordance with the expression of Judge, Bono and Locke (Judge and Bono 2001) that there is an indirect influence of self-efficacy on job satisfaction as part of self-evaluations ( core self-evaluations ) which can usually be through job characteristic variables ( perceived job…”
supports “Social cognitive theory is applied to recognized the significance understanding of self-efficacy as a key predictor of job performance and attitudes (Judge & Bono, 2001; Luthans & Stajkovic, 1998) promoting personal well-being (Dace et al., 2020).”
disputes “This finding is consistent with previous research by (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012), (Zimmerman et al., 1993), (Wood & Bandura, 1989), (Judge & Bono, 2001), and (Ferris et al., 2011), which all found a negative impact of self-efficacy on work performance.”
supports “With few exceptions (i.e., Alessandri et al., 2015), as noted earlier, previous studies adopted a static/cross-sectional design to investigate the relationship between self-efficacy and job performance (Judge & Bono, 2001).”
supports “Judge & Bono (2001) conducted a meta-analysis of eighteen studies to identify the relationships between variables such as self-esteem, self-Anuarul efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability with job performance and satisfaction.”
supports “In line with this opinion, Judge and Bono (Judge and Bono 2001) emphasized that in general self-efficacy influences job satisfaction, meaning that individuals with a high level of self-efficacy will be more effective in overcoming difficulties and able to survive failure.”
Ancillary research
Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.
- 10.31538/ndh.v8i3.4091
- 10.6007/ijarbss/v14-i7/22009
- 10.1080/00223891.2024.2335912
- 10.59888/ajosh.v2i8.312
- 10.1002/ijop.13262
- 10.18662/upasw/29/84
Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.