Search

Addressing a lack of individual differences parameters in equity theory as presented by J. S. Adams, this thesis states that different individuals perceive the same ambiguous job elements differently (as inputs or outcomes); this, in turn, either facilitates or attenuates the predicted main effects of under- and over-reward in terms of job performance and attitudes. A 120-item moderator was empirically developed to test the thesis. It served to subgroup 91 male college students who had previously participated in 7-day equity study. Their data were reanalyzed, separately. The results generally supported the thesis and its differential predictions. The differential results, using subgrouping, were discussed and related to earlier main effect results, using the total undifferentiated group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extensive empirical research has been concerned with job performance and performance change, but virtually nothing has been done to develop a broader conceptual framework which might be useful in giving direction to further research. Toward this end, a number of diverse and previously unrelated empirical findings relevant to job performance are shown to converge on one generalization which accounts for all. The central theme of this generalization pertains to the changing nature of performance across time. The applicability of this generalization beyond the job performance setting is shown by various findings from psychological testing and animal learning research. The increased use of this inductive approach is suggested as one possible way to alleviate the widely recognized shortage of theory in industrial-differential psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]