print

Correlational findings

Study Wright et al. (2002): study US 1997

Public:
Public-sector managers, USA, 2002, followed 2 years
Sample:
Respondents:
N = 59
Non Response:
17
Assessment:
Questionnaire: paper
Work performance rated by management.

Correlate

Authors's label
Composite job performance
Our Classification
Operationalization
Rating by top-ranking administrative officer on 3 dimensions of work performance:
- work facilitation
- goal emphasis
- team building
Rated from 1(never) to 5(always)
These 3 dimensions were summed to form a composite measure of performance.

Rated at T1 and T2 for the past year

Observed Relation with Happiness

Happiness Measure Statistics Elaboration / Remarks A-BB-u-mq-v-3-e r = +.37 p < .05 T1 happiness by T1 work performance A-BB-u-mq-v-3-e r = +.45 p < .01 T1 happiness by T2 work performance A-BB-u-mq-v-3-e Beta = +.77 p < .05 T1 happiness by T1-T2 CHANGE in performance.
Beta controlled for:
- T1 negative affectivity
- T1 positive affectivity
- T1 job satisfaction
- T1 workperformance (this control indicates change)

Addition of T1 happiness in a hierarchical regression increases R2 from .15 to .31

Happiness predicts performance much better than job satisfaction.