Social Indicators Research

, 90:351 | Cite as

Investigating Importance Weighting of Satisfaction Scores from a Formative Model with Partial Least Squares Analysis

  • Chia-Huei Wu
  • Lung Hung Chen
  • Ying-Mei TsaiEmail author


This study introduced a formative model to investigate the utility of importance weighting on satisfaction scores with partial least squares analysis. Based on the bottom-up theory of satisfaction evaluations, the measurement structure for weighted/unweighted domain satisfaction scores was modeled as a formative model, whereas the measurement structure for global satisfaction scores was modeled as a reflective model according to top-down theory. The purpose was to see if the predictive effect of importance-weighted domain satisfaction scores is stronger than unweighted domain satisfaction scores in predicting global satisfaction scores. Three datasets in life, self, and job satisfaction were analyzed. In the life satisfaction dataset, 237 undergraduates at Central Taiwan University of Science and Technology voluntarily provided their responses. The mean age of respondents was 20.80 years (SD = 1.05). In the self-satisfaction dataset, 269 undergraduates at National Taiwan University provided their responses. The mean age of respondents was 19.78 years (SD = 1.44). Finally, in the job satisfaction dataset, 557 staff members in seven Taiwan provincial hospitals provided their responses. The mean age of respondents was 35.87 years (range from 21 to 65, SD = 8.60). Three measures of domain satisfaction, domain importance, and global satisfaction were collected in each dataset. Partial least squares analysis was used in model estimation. All the results revealed that unweighted domain satisfaction scores have a stronger predictive effect for global satisfaction measures than importance-weighted domain satisfaction scores, indicating that importance weighting on satisfaction scores did not have an empirical benefit.


Satisfaction Weighting Importance Partial least squares 



This research was partially supported by a grant from the Central Taiwan University of Science and Technology (CTU97-P-24) to Ying-Mei Tsai.


  1. Brennan, K. A., & Morris, K. A. (1997). Attachment styles, self-esteem, and patterns of seeking feedback from romantic partners. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Campbell, J. D. (1990). Self-esteem and certainty of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 538–549. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.59.3.538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Campbell, J. D., Trapnell, P., Heine, S. J., Katz, I. M., Lavallee, L. F., & Lehman, D. R. (1996). Self-concept clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 141–156. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 644–663. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cummins, R. A. (1997). Comprehensive quality of life scale—adult: Manual. Deakin: University Australia.Google Scholar
  7. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R., & Smith, H. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ewen, R. B. (1967). Weighting components of job satisfaction. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 68–73. doi: 10.1037/h0024243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferrans, C., & Powers, M. (1985). Quality of life index: Development and psychometric properties. Advances in Nursing Science, 8, 15–24.Google Scholar
  12. Ferrans, C., & Powers, M. (1992). Psychometric assessment of the Quality of Life Index. Research in Nursing & Health, 15, 29–38. doi: 10.1002/nur.4770150106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 440–452. doi: 10.2307/3151718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobserved variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50. doi: 10.2307/3151312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedlander, F. (1965). Relationships between the importance and the satisfaction of various environmental factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 160–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frisch, M. B. (1992). Use of the Quality of Life Inventory in problem assessment and treatment planning for cognitive therapy of depression. In A. Freeman & F. M. Dattlio (Eds.), Comprehensive casebook of cognitive therapy. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fu, J. R. (2006). VisualPLS 1.04b1. Taiwan: National Kaohsiung University of Applied Sciences.Google Scholar
  18. Griffin, D., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Models of the self and other: Fundamental dimensions underlying measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 430–445. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Haenlein, M., & Kaplan, A. M. (2004). A beginner’s guide to partial least squares analysis. Understanding Statistics, 3, 283–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Headey, B., Veenhoveen, R., & Wearing, A. (1991). Top-down versus bottom-up theories of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 24, 81–100. doi: 10.1007/BF00292652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hsieh, C. M. (2003). Counting importance: The case of life satisfaction and relative domain importance. Social Indicators Research, 61, 227–240. doi: 10.1023/A:1021354132664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hsieh, C. M. (2004). To weight or not to weight: The role of domain importance in quality of life measurement. Social Indicators Research, 68, 163–174. doi: 10.1023/B:SOCI.0000025591.82518.ab.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lance, C. E., Mallard, A. G., & Michalos, A. C. (1995). Tests of the causal directions of global-life facet satisfaction relationships. Social Indicators Research, 34, 69–92. doi: 10.1007/BF01078968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Locke, E. A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 309–336. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(69)90013-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1343). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  26. McFarlin, D. B., & Rice, R. W. (1992). The role of facet importance as a moderator in job satisfaction processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 41–45. doi: 10.1002/job.4030130105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McFarlin, D. B., Coster, E. A., Rice, R. W., & Coopper-Alison, T. (1995). Facet importance and job satisfaction: Another look at the range of affect hypothesis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 16, 489–502. doi: 10.1207/s15324834basp1604_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meuleners, L. B., & Lee, A. H. (2005). Quality of life profile-adolescent version: Assessing the relationship of covariates to scale scores using structural equation modeling. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1057–1063. doi: 10.1007/s11136-004-2573-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mikes, P. S., & Hulin, C. L. (1968). Use of importance as weighting component of job satisfaction. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 52, 394–398. doi: 10.1037/h0026242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mobley, W. H., & Locke, E. A. (1970). The relationship of value importance to satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5, 463–483. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(70) 90035-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.5.2.164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Raphael, D., Rukholm, E., Brown, I., Hill-Bailey, P., & Donato, E. (1996). The quality of life profile-adolescent version: Background, description, and initial validation. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 19, 366–375. doi: 10.1016/S1054-139X(96)00080-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rice, R. W., Gentile, D. A., & McFarlin, D. B. (1991a). Facet importance and job satisfaction. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 31–39. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.76.1.31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rice, R. W., Markus, K., Moyer, R. P., & McFarlin, D. B. (1991b). Facet importance and job satisfaction: Two experimental tests of Locke’s range of affect hypothesis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1977–1987. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00517.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roberts, J. E., Gotlib, I. H., & Kassel, J. D. (1996). Adult attachment security and symptoms of depression: The mediating roles of dysfunctional attitudes and low self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 310–320. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  37. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Russell, L., & Hubley, A. M. (2005). Importance ratings and weighting: Old concerns and new perspectives. International Journal of Testing, 5, 105–130. doi: 10.1207/s15327574ijt0502_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Russell, L. B., Hubley, A. M., Palepu, A., & Zumbo, B. D. (2006). Does weighting capture what’s important? Revisiting subjective importance weighting with a quality of life measure. Social Indicators Research, 75, 141–167. doi: 10.1007/s11205-004-2528-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Staples, D. S., & Higgins, C. A. (1998). A study of the impact of factor importance weightings on job satisfaction measures. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 211–232. doi: 10.1023/A:1022907023046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tam, S. C. (1999). The impact of incentive factors on job satisfaction of provincial hospitals in Taiwan. NSC87-2416-H260-001.Google Scholar
  42. Trauer, T., & Mackinnon, A. (2001). Why are we weighting? The role of importance ratings in quality of life measurement. Quality of Life Research, 10, 579–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Waters, L. K. (1969). The utility of importance weights in predicting overall job satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29, 519–522. doi: 10.1177/001316446902900235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Waters, L. K., & Roach, D. (1971). Comparison of unweighted and importance-weighted job satisfaction measures for three samples of female office workers. Psychological Reports, 28, 779–782.Google Scholar
  45. Wu, C. H. (2007). The relationship between attachment style and self-concept clarity: The mediation effect of self-esteem. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  46. Wu, C. H. (2008a). Examining the appropriateness of importance weighting on satisfaction score from range-of-affect hypothesis: Hierarchical linear modeling for within-subject data. Social Indicators Research, 86, 101–111. doi: 10.1007/s11205-007-9103-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wu, C. H. (2008b). Can we weight satisfaction score with importance ranks across life domains? Social Indicators Research, 86, 468–480.Google Scholar
  48. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006a). Do we need to weight item satisfaction by item importance? A perspective from Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Social Indicators Research, 79, 485–502. doi: 10.1007/s11205-005-5666-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006b). Do we need to weight satisfaction scores with importance ratings in measuring quality of life? Social Indicators Research, 78, 305–326. doi: 10.1007/s11205-005-0212-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006c). Analysis of factorial invariance across gender in the Taiwan version of the satisfaction with life scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1259–1268. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2007a). Importance has been considered in satisfaction evaluation: An experimental examination of Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Social Indicators Research, 81, 521–541. doi: 10.1007/s11205-006-0021-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2007b). Examining the relationship between global and domain measures of quality of life by three factor structure models. Social Indicators Research, 84, 189–202. doi: 10.1007/s11205-006-9082-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Business and ManagementNational Chiao Tung UniversityHsinchuTaiwan, ROC
  2. 2.Graduate Institute of Physical EducationNational Taiwan Sport UniversityTaoyuan CountyTaiwan, ROC
  3. 3.Office of Physical EducationCentral Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaichung CityTaiwan, ROC

Personalised recommendations