WECT Project Measures

Initial Survey – Section 1

The initial survey began with a description of the project and a consent form. After providing consent, participants were instructed that the survey contained five sections, each of which would take 15-30 minutes to complete. Breaks were permitted between each section.

Section 1 contained a demographic questionnaire, followed by a job description questionnaire. Included in the job questionnaire were items assessing:

• Job title, job description and duties, job start date
• Number of hours worked (past week and typically)
• Income
• Hours of sleep on average work and non-work nights
• Worker class (e.g., employee of a private company or the government – adapted from U.S. Census)
• Occupational classification (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010)
  • U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2010). 2010 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC User Guide). Available from: http://www.bls.gov/soc/#materials
• Organization size
• Work group size
• Number of people supervised
• Whether there is a formal ethics code that is enforced
• Organizational fusion (pictorial fusion item adapted from Swann, Gomez, Seyle, Morales, & Huici, 2009)
  • Swann, W. B. Jr., Gómez, A., Seyle, C. D., Morales, J. F. & Huici, C. (2009). Identity fusion: The interplay of personal and social identities in extreme group behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 995–1011.
• Job satisfaction(Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klesh, 1983)
  • Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, G. D., & Klesh, J.R. (1983). Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members. In S. E. Seashore, E. E. Lawler, P. H. Mirvis & C. Cammann (Eds.), Assessing organizational change: A guide to methods, measures, and practices (pp. 71-138). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Quality of job alternatives & job investment size(Rusbult, Farrell, Rogers, & Mainous, 1988)
  • Rusbult, C. E., Farrell, D., Rogers, G., & Mainous, A. G. (1988). Impact of exchange variables on exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect: An integrative model of responses to declining job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 599-627.
• Organizational descriptors (bipolar adjective pairs)
• Intention to turnover (looked for new job during past week, will look in next 3 months, will look in next year)

Initial Survey – Section 2

Section 2 contained individual difference questionnaires. Items within each questionnaire were randomized for each participant. The first three measures (i.e., GASP, HEXACO, Self-Control) were presented in a randomized order for each participant. The last two measures in this section (i.e., SWLS, R-EDS) were also presented in a randomized order for each participant.

• Guilt and Shame Proneness Scale (GASP)
  • Cohen, T. R., Wolf, S. T., Panter, A. T., & Insko, C. A. (2011). Introducing the GASP scale: A new measure of Guilt and Shame Proneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(5), 947-966. doi: 10.1037/a0022641.
  • Available: http://wpweb2.tepper.cmu.edu/facultyadmin/upload/url1_7865230971286_Guilt_and_Shame_Proneness_GASP_Scale_August2011.pdf

• HEXACO Personality Inventory-60 Items (HEXACO-PI-R-60)
  • Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 340-345.
  • Available: http://hexaco.org/downloading.html

• Brief Self-Control Measure [this scale was not included in WECT2011]
  • Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271-324. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x

• Conflict Templates (Conflict Contingency Beliefs) [this scale was not included in WECT2011]
  • Halevy, N., Cohen, T. R., Chou, E. Y., Katz, J. J., & Panter, A. T. An interdependence analysis of social relations in organizations. Manuscript submitted for publication (2012).

• Future Self-Continuity Scale(for 3 months and 10 years)
  • Ersner-Hershfield, H., Garton, M. T., Ballard, K., Samanez-Larkin, G. R., & Knutson, B. (2009). Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow: Individual differences in future self-continuity account for saving. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 280-286.

• Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS)
  • Diener, E. , Emmons, R.A., Larson, R.J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.

• Revised Everyday Discrimination Scale (R-EDS)
  • Stucky, B., Gottfredson, N. C., Panter, A. T., Daye, C. E., Allen, W. R., & Wightman, L. F. (2011). An item response theory-based revision of the Everyday Discrimination Scale. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17(2), 175-185. doi: 10.1037/a0023356

Initial Survey – Section 3

Section 3 contained work questionnaires. The order in which the scales were presented and the order of the items within each scale were randomized for each participant.

• Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ)
  • Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1321-1339. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321

• Organizational Commitment Scale – Short Form [Affective and Normative Commitment only; Continuous Commitment not included]
  • Original scale:
  • Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Short Form:
• Gellatly, I. R., Meyer, J. P., & Luchak, A. A. (2006). Combined effects of the three commitment components on focal and discretionary behaviors: A test of Meyer and Herscovitch’s propositions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(2), 331-345. doi: 16/j.jvb.2005.12.005

• Perceived Organizational Support (POS) [8-item version]
  • Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507.
  • Available: http://www.psychology.uh.edu/faculty/Eisenberger/POS.html

• Organizational Justice Scale [6 procedural justice items only]
  • Moorman, Blakely, & Niehoff (1998). Does perceived organizational support mediate the relationship between procedural justice and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 351-357.

• Perceptions of Politics Scale (POP) [Pay and Promotion Policies subscale omitted]
  • Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1997). Further validation of the perceptions of politics scale (POPS): A multiple sample investigation. Journal of Management, 23(5), 627-658.

• Organizational Constraints Scale (OCS)
  • Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal Conflict at Work Scale, Organizational Constraints Scale, Quantitative Workload Inventory, and Physical Symptoms Inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356–367.
  • Available: http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~pspector/scales/strspage.html

Initial Survey – Section 4

Section 4 contained individual difference questionnaires. The order in which the scales were presented and the order of the items within each scale were randomized for each participant.

• Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) [Empathic Concern and Perspective Taking only]
  • Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.

• Self-Importance of Moral Identity
  • Aquino, K., & Reed, A. I. I. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1423–1440. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1423

• Ethics Position Questionnaire (EPQ)
  • Forsyth, D. R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 175-184.
  • Available: https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~dforsyth/ethics/ethics2.htm

• Consideration of Future Consequences Scale (CFC)
  • Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 742-752.

• Narcissism Personality Inventory-16 (NPI-16) [Exploitiveness-Entitlement dimension only]
  • Original scale:
  • Ames, D. R., Rose, P., & Anderson, C. P. (2006). The NPI-16 as a short measure of narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 440-450.
• Conference paper identifying Exploitativeness/Entitlement as a distinct dimension of narcissism:
• White, J. B., Goldman, B. M. & Ng, I. W .-C. (2011, July). Narcissism and the negotiation relationship: Exploring the dark side. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Association for Conflict Management, July 2011, Istanbul.

• Machievellianism (MachIV) [this scale was not included in WECT2011]
  • Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic Press.

Initial Survey – Section 5

Section 5 contained the short form of the Defining Issues Test 1, purchased from The Center for the Study of Ethical Development: http://www.ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/publications-and-papers)

• Defining Issues Test 1 (DIT1) – Short Form (3 dilemmas)
• Rest, J. (1986). Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory. New York: Praeger.

• Comments: The survey ended with an open-ended question asking participants whether they had any questions or comments about the research project.

Final Survey

The final survey was administered in week 13 of the project, after the 12th weekly survey was completed. The final survey was identical to the initial survey except it did not contain the DIT1 (i.e., section 5). In addition, some of the items from the job description questionnaire were omitted. In WECT2011, the WDQ was not included in the final survey, but it was included in the WECT2012 final survey.