Self-esteem represents one of the most important personal resources for workers. However, the value of different forms of self-esteem (i.e., global vs. organization-specific) for work outcomes and their reciprocal associations over time have yet to be examined. This preregistered study examined (1) longitudinal reciprocal relations between global and organizational self-esteem, (2) prospective effects of global and organizational self-esteem on job satisfaction and work engagement, and (3) the role of organizational self-esteem as a mediator of the effects of global self-esteem on job satisfaction and work engagement. Using data on 1014 workers who were assessed annually during the first three years of their careers, we implemented three cross-lagged panel (CLPM) models: the traditional CLPM, the Random Intercept-CLPM, and the Latent State Trait Model. The results from the best fitting model (the Latent State Trait Model), as well as the other two, failed to support our preregistered hypotheses; instead, the findings suggest that global and organizational self-esteem are largely independent, at both the between- and within-person level, and that neither form of self-esteem has important effects on job satisfaction or work engagement.
AlessandriG.VecchioneM.DonnellanB. M.TisakJ. (2013). An application of the LC-LSTM framework to the self-esteem instability case. Psychometrika, 78, 769–792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-013-9326-4
BakkerA. B.SchaufeliW. B.LeiterM. P.TarisT. W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393649
4.
BauerT. N.BodnerT.ErdoganB.TruxilloD. M.TuckerJ. S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review of antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 707–721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.707
5.
BerryD.WilloughbyM. T. (2017). On the practical interpretability of cross lagged panel models: Rethinking a developmental workhorse. Child Development, 88(4), 1186–1206. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12660
6.
BowlingN. A.EschlemanK. J.WangQ.KirkendallC.AlarconG. (2010). A meta analysis of the predictors and consequences of organization based self esteem. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(3), 601–626. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X454382
7.
BriefA. P. (1998). Attitudes in and around organizations. Sage.
8.
BrownD.Zeigler HillV. (2018). Self esteem. In FerrisD.JohnsonR.SedikidesC. (Eds.), The self at work: Fundamental theory and research (pp. 40–71).
9.
BrownJ. D.DuttonK. A. (1995). The thrill of victory, the complexity of defeat: Self-esteem and people's emotional reactions to success and failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 712–722. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.712
10.
BurnhamK. P.AndersonD. R. (2004). Multimodel inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods and Research, 33(2), 261–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124104_268644
11.
CampbellJ. D. (1990). Self-esteem and clarity of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(3), 538–549. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.3.538
12.
CapraraG. V.AlessandriG.Di GiuntaL.PaneraiL.EisenbergN. (2010). The contribution of agreeableness and self-efficacy beliefs to prosociality. European Journal of Personality, 24(1), 36–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.739
13.
ChenG.GoddardT. G.CasperW. J. (2004). Examination of the relationships among general and work-specific self-evaluations, work-related control beliefs, and job attitudes. Applied Psychology: International Review, 53(3), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00175.x
14.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
15.
ColeD. A.MaxwellS. E. (2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and Tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4), 558–577. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.558
16.
CropanzanoR.GrandeyA. A. (1998). If politics is a game, then what are the rules? Three suggestions for ethical management. In SchminkeM. (Ed.), Organizations and ethics: Morally managing people and processes (pp. 133–152). Erlbaum.
17.
DappL. C.KraussS.OrthU. (2022). Testing the bottom-up and top-down models of self-esteem: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(5), 1111–1131. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000444
18.
DodgsonP. G.WoodJ. V. (1998). Self-esteem and the cognitive accessibility of strengths and weaknesses after failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 178–197. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.178
19.
DonnellanM. B.KennyD. A.TrzesniewskiK. H.LucasR. E.CongerR. D. (2012). Using trait–state models to evaluate the longitudinal consistency of global self-esteem from adolescence to adulthood. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(6), 634–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.07.005
20.
DonnellanM. B.TrzesniewskiK. H.RobinsR. W. (2011). Self-esteem: Enduring issues and controversies. In Chamorro-PremuzicT.von StummS.FurnhamA. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 718–746). Wiley-Blackwell.
21.
EhmJ.-H.HasselhornM.SchmiedekF. (2019). Analyzing the developmental relation of academic self-concept and achievement in elementary school children: Alternative models point to different results. Developmental Psychology, 55(11), 2336–2351. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000796
22.
EidM.HoltmannJ.SantangeloP.Ebner-PriemerU. (2017). On the definition of latent-state-trait models with autoregressive effects: Insights from LST-R theory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33(4), 285–295. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000435
23.
FayardJ. V.RobertsB. W.RobinsR. W.WatsonD. (2012). Uncovering the affective core of conscientiousness: The role of self conscious emotions. Journal of Personality, 80(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00720.x
24.
FilosaL.AlessandriG. (2022). Validation of the organizational-based general self-esteem (OB-GSE) scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.865153
25.
FilosaL.AlessandriG. (2023). Longitudinal correlated changes of global and organization-based self-esteem at work. In Applied psychology: An international review. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12484
26.
GardnerD. G.PierceJ. L. (1998). Self-esteem and self-efficacy within the organizational context: An empirical examination. Group & Organization Management, 23(1), 48–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601198231004
27.
HalbeslebenJ. R.WheelerA. R. (2008). The relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in predicting job performance and intention to leave. Work and Stress, 22(3), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802383962
28.
HamakerE. L.KuiperR. M.GrasmanR. P. P. P. (2015). A critique of the cross-lagged panel model. Psychological Methods, 20(1), 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038889
29.
HayesA. F.ScharkowM. (2013). The relative trustworthiness of inferential tests of the indirect effect in statistical mediation analysis: Does method really matter?Psychological Science, 24(10), 1918–1927. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613480187
30.
HellerD.FerrisD. L.BrownD.WatsonD. (2009). The influence of work personality on job satisfaction: Incremental validity and mediation effects. Journal of Personality, 77(4), 1051–1084. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00574.x
31.
HobfollS. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
HobfollS. E.HalbeslebenJ.NeveuJ. P.WestmanM. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640
JudgeT. A.BonoJ. E. (2001a). 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. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.80
36.
JudgeT. A.BonoJ. E. (2001b). 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. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.80
37.
KahnW. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.5465/256287
38.
KormanA. K. (1970). Toward an hypothesis of work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028656
39.
KormanA. K. (1966). Self-esteem variable in vocational choice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 50(6), 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0024039
KraussS.OrthU. (2022). Work experiences and self-esteem development: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. European Journal of Personality, 36(6), 849–869. https://doi.org/10.1177/08902070211027142
42.
KusterF.OrthU.MeierL. L. (2013). High self-esteem prospectively predicts better work conditions and outcomes. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(6), 668–675. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550613479806
43.
LearyM.BaumeisterR. (2000). The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory. In ZannaM. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 32, pp. 1–62). Academic Press.
44.
LearyM. R. (2012). Sociometer theory. In Van LangeP. A. M.KruglanskiA. W.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 141–159). Sage.
45.
LittleT. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press.
46.
LockeE.McClearK.KnightD. (1996). Self-esteem and work. In CooperC.RobertsonI. (Eds.), International review of industrial andorganizational psychology (pp. 1–32). New York: Wiley.
47.
LucasR. E. (2023). Why the cross-lagged panel model is almost never the right choice. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231158378
48.
MacKinnonD. P.LockwoodC. M.HoffmanJ. M.WestS. G.SheetsV. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83
49.
MarshH. W. (1990). A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology Review, 2(4), 77–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01322177
50.
MarshH. W.CravenR. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 133–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00010.x
51.
MarshH. W.MartinA. J. (2011). Academic self concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910X503501
52.
MarshH. W.O'MaraA. (2008). Reciprocal effects between academic self-concept, self-esteem, achievement, and attainment over seven adolescent years: Unidimensional and multidimensional perspectives of self-concept. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(4), 542–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207312313
53.
MarshH. W.YeungA. S. (1998). Top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal models: The direction of causality in multidimensional, hierarchical self-concept models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(2), 509–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.2.509
54.
MaxwellS. E.ColeD. A. (2007). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.23
OrthU.ClarkD. A.DonnellanM. B.RobinsR. W. (2021). Testing prospective effects in longitudinal research: Comparing seven competing cross-lagged models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(4), 1013–1034. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000358
59.
OrthU.RobinsR. W. (2022). Is high self-esteem beneficial? Revisiting a classic question. American Psychologist, 77(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000922
60.
OrthU.TrzesniewskiK. H.RobinsR. W. (2010). Self-esteem development from young adulthood to old age: A cohort-sequential longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(4), 645–658. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018769
61.
OuweneelE.Le BlancP. M.SchaufeliW. B.van WijheC. I. (2012). Good morning, good day: A diary study on positive emotions, hope, and work engagement. Human relations, 65(9), 1129–1154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726711429382
62.
PerinelliE.AlessandriG. (2020). A latent state trait analysis of global self esteem: A reconsideration of its state like component in an organizational setting. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 28(4), 465–483. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12308
63.
PerinelliE.AlessandriG.CepaleG.FraccaroliF. (2021). The Sociometer Theory at work: Exploring the organizational interpersonal roots of self-esteem. In Applied psychology: An international review. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12312
64.
PierceJ. L.GardnerD. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational context: A review of the organization-based self-esteem literature. Journal of Management, 30(5), 591–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2003.10.001
65.
PierceJ. L.GardnerD. G. (2009). Relationships of personality and job characteristics with organization‐based self‐esteem. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(5), 392–409. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940910959735
66.
PierceJ. L.GardnerD. G.CummingsL. L.DunhamR. B. (1989). Organization based self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 622–648. https://doi.org/10.5465/256437
67.
RentzschK.Schröder-AbéM. (2022). Top down or bottom up? Evidence from the longitudinal development of global and domain-specific self-esteem in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(4), 714–730. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000393
68.
RobertsB.WoodD.CaspiA. (2008). The development of personality traits in adulthood. In JohnO.RobinsR.PervinL. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 375–398). Guilford Press.
69.
RobinsR. W.HendinH. M.TrzesniewskiK. H. (2001). Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201272002
70.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press.
71.
SaksA. M. (2018). Job search and the school-to-work transition. In KleheU. C.Van HooftE. A. (Eds.), Handbook of job loss and job search (pp. 1–29). Oxford Univ. Press.
72.
SchaubroeckJ.KimY. J.PengA. C. (2012). The self-concept in organizational psychology: Clarifying and differentiating the constructs. In HodgkinsonG. P.FordJ. K. (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology International review of industrial and organizational psychology (vol. 27, pp. 1–38). Wiley-Blackwell.
73.
SchaufeliW. B.SalanovaM.González-RomáV.BakkerA. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326
74.
SchaufeliW. B.BakkerA. B.SalanovaM. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
75.
ShavelsonR. J.BolusR. (1982). Self-concept: The interplay of theory and methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.74.1.3
76.
ShavelsonR. J.HubnerJ. J.StantonG. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407–441. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543046003407
77.
StantonJ. M.SinarE. F.BalzerW. K.JulianA. L.ThoresenP.AzizS.SmithP. C. (2002). Development of a compact measure of job satisfaction: The abridged Job Descriptive Index. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(1), 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316440206200112
78.
SwannW. B.Jr. (2012). Self-verification theory. In Van LangeP. A. M.KruglanskiA. W.HigginsE. T. (Eds.) Handbook of theories of social psychology, (vol. 2, pp. 23–42). Sage Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n27
79.
SwannW. B.Jr.Chang-SchneiderC.McClartyK. L. (2007). Do people’s self-views matter? Self-Concept and self-esteem in everyday life. American Psychologist, 62(2), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.2.84
UsamiS.HayesT.McArdleJ. J. (2015). On the mathematical relationship between latent change score and autoregressive cross-lagged factor approaches: Cautions for inferring causal relationship between variables. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(6), 676–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2015.1079696
82.
UsamiS.MurayamaK.HamakerE. L. (2019). A unified framework of longitudinal models to examine reciprocal relations. Psychological Methods, 24(5), 637–657. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000210
83.
VogelR. M.MitchellM. S. (2017). The motivational effects of diminished self-esteem for employees who experience abusive supervision. Journal of Management, 43(7), 2218–2251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314566462
84.
XanthopoulouD.BakkerA. B.DemeroutiE.SchaufeliW. B. (2007). The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 14(2), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.121
85.
XanthopoulouD.BakkerA. B.DemeroutiE.SchaufeliW. B. (2009). Reciprocal relationships between job resources, personal resources, and work engagement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(3), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.11.003
86.
ZyphurM. J.VoelkleM. C.TayL.AllisonP. D.PreacherK. J.ZhangZ.DienerE. (2020). From data to causes II: Comparing approaches to panel data analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 23(4), 688–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428119847280
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
