Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Job Satisfaction in the “Big Four” of Europe: Reasoning Between Feeling and Uncertainty Through CUB Models

  • 301 Accesses

  • 3 Citations

Abstract

The paper offers a comparative investigation of objective and subjective driving forces behind the satisfaction that people feel in their job in four representative countries of Western Europe. The main element of this work’s novelty is its linking the research of cross-country similarities and differences in the leading determinants of global job satisfaction to methodological issues that arise when responses to survey questions are detected on a rating scale through self-evaluation. In particular, this paper is one of the first attempts to test the potentialities of CUB models on EWCS data in a broader conceptual framework in which the response on overall job satisfaction depends on some psychological dynamics of the evaluation process. Although overall job satisfaction is significantly higher for British and German employees, the subjective factors—the amount of socio-economic security embodied in a job, the working conditions and the aspects of work–life balance—are the most relevant in shaping job satisfaction, disregarding the myth that considers earnings as the dominant factor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    The shifted Binomial is preferred because its support coincides to the choice set {1, 2,…, m}, which is more common than the Binomial support that starts with 0.

  2. 2.

    In rating analysis that expresses a direct evaluation on the item, \(\left( {1 - \xi } \right)\) increases with agreement towards the item. In ranking analyses that put at first place the best item, \(\xi\) increases with the expressed preference.

  3. 3.

    The extreme values of \(\pi_{i}\) are associated to complete uncertainty (\(\pi = 0)\), and the mixture resolves to a discrete Uniform random variable where any category has the same probability to be chosen, and to no uncertainty (\(\pi = 1)\) when the choice is completely determined by feeling.

  4. 4.

    Another extension of CUB models, not implemented in this analysis, considers the shelter effect that allows modelling the presence of a sort of “refuge” category (Corduas et al. 2009; Iannario 2012a). A more Generalised class of CUB models (GeCUB) is also defined if covariates are included into a CUB model with shelter effect (Iannario and Piccolo 2012b, 2016). Capecchi and Piccolo (2016) proposed a Combination of a discrete Uniform random variable with a SHelter effect (CUSH models). Iannario (2012b, 2014) designed CUBE models as a Combination of a Uniform and a BEta-binomial distribution, which allow capturing a possible over-dispersion; its specific case (IHG) is applied when the data generating process follows an Inverse Hyper-Geometric distribution, which is adequate if the mode is an extreme value of the support. Varying Uncertainty in CUB models (VCUB) is the most recent generalisation to consider the uncertainty component differently from the discrete Uniform distribution (Gottard et al. 2016).

  5. 5.

    EWCS is a questionnaire-based survey with interviews conducted face-to-face to a random sample of persons in employment, both employees and self-employed, which is representative of the entire working population in each European country. The sampling strategy is based on a multi-stage design where each country is divided into sections based on region and degree of urbanisation, in each of which a number of PSUs is drawn randomly. A random sample of households is then drawn in each PSU, and in each household, the interviewee is the worker who has the birthday next. In general, in 2010, the total number of completed interviews was 43,816 on 34 countries and around 1.000 in most countries. Precisely, in Germany it was 2.133, in Italy 1.500, in the UK 1.575, and in France 3.046. Further technical details can be found in the 2010 Technical Report (www.eurofound.europa.eu) where official documents that provide a complete and rigorous description of EWCS variables are available.

  6. 6.

    A restriction has been made omitting the “do not know” and “refusals” on the question concerning the overall job satisfaction, whose incidence (0.7% on the entire dataset) is somewhat negligible. Precisely, on the restricted dataset to each country, the shares are: 0.93% for France, 0.23% for Germany, 0.47% for Italy, and 0.99% for the United Kingdom.

References

  1. Arnold, H. J., Feldman, D. C., & Purbhoo, M. (1985). The role of social-desirability response bias in turnover research. Academy of Management Journal, 28(4), 955–966.

  2. Ayim Gyekye, S. (2005). Workers’ perceptions of workplace safety and job satisfaction. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 11(3), 291–302.

  3. Bakhshi, A., Sharma, S., Kumar, K., & Sharma, A. (2008). Job satisfaction as predictor of life satisfaction: A study on lecturers in government & private colleges in Jammu. Prachi Psycho-cultural Research Association, 24(2), 1–6.

  4. Baraldi, A. N., & Enders, C. K. (2010). An introduction to modern missing data analyses. Journal of School Psychology, 48(1), 5–37.

  5. Belfield, C. R., & Harris, R. D. F. (2002). How well do theories of job matching explain variations in job satisfaction across education levels? Evidence for UK graduates. Applied Economics, 34(5), 535–548.

  6. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (1999). Well-being, insecurity and the decline of American job satisfaction. NBER working paper, 7487.

  7. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2004). Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. Journal of Public Economics, 88(7), 1359–1386.

  8. Borooah, V. (2009). Comparing levels of job satisfaction in the countries of Western and Eastern Europe. MPRA Paper 23664, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2009.

  9. Bryson, A., Cappellari, L., & Lucifora, C. (2004). Does union membership really reduce job satisfaction? British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42(3), 439–459.

  10. Capecchi, S., Iannario, M., & Piccolo, D. (2012). Almalaurea Working Papers n. 56.

  11. Capecchi, S., & Piccolo, D. (2016). Investigating the determinants of job satisfaction of Italian graduates: A model-based approach. Journal of Applied Statistics, 43(1), 169–179.

  12. Castellano, R., Manna, R., & Punzo, G. (2016). Income inequality between overlapping and stratification: A longitudinal analysis of personal earnings in France and Italy. International Review of Applied Economics, 30(5), 567–590.

  13. Castellano, R., & Punzo, G. (2013). The role of family background in the heterogeneity of self-employment in some transition countries. Transition Studies Review, 20(1), 79–88.

  14. Cheema, J. R. (2014). Some general guidelines for choosing missing data handling methods in educational research. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 13(2), 3.

  15. Clark, A. E. (1996). Job satisfaction in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 34(2), 189–217.

  16. Clark, A. E. (1997). Job satisfaction and gender: Why are women so happy at work? Labour Economics, 4(4), 341–372.

  17. Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1996). Satisfaction and comparison income. Journal of Public Economics, 61(3), 359–381.

  18. Clark, A., Oswald, A., & Warr, P. (1996). Is job satisfaction U-shaped in age? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69(1), 57–81.

  19. Clarke, M. C., Koch, L. C., & Hill, E. J. (2004). The work–family interface: Differentiating balance and fit. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 33(2), 121–140.

  20. Corduas, M., Iannario, M., & Piccolo, D. (2009). A class of statistical models for evaluating services and performances. In M. Bini (Ed.), Statistical methods for the evaluation of educational services and quality of products (pp. 99–117). Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.

  21. Decancq, K., Fleurbaey, M., & Schokkaert, E. (2015). Happiness, equivalent incomes and respect for individual preferences. Economica, 82(s1), 1082–1106.

  22. Delecta, P. (2011). Work life balance. International Journal of Current Research, 3(4), 186–189.

  23. D’Elia, A., & Piccolo, D. (2005). A mixture model for preferences data analysis. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 49(3), 917–934.

  24. Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 39, 1–38.

  25. Di Iorio, F., & Iannario, M. (2012). Residual diagnostics for interpreting CUB models. Statistica, 72(2), 163.

  26. Drobnič, S., Beham, B., & Präg, P. (2010). Good job, good life? Working conditions and quality of life in Europe. Social Indicators Research, 99(2), 205–225.

  27. Eurofound (2007), Anderson, R., Mikulic, B., Vermeylen, G., Lyly-Yrjanainen, M., & Zigante, V. (2009). Second European quality of life survey-overview.

  28. Eurofound (2012). Quality of work and employment: A policy tool towards inclusive and sustainable growth—Conference Report. Dublin: Eurofound.

  29. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. (2012). European Working Conditions Survey, 2010. UK Data Service. SN: 6971.

  30. Faragher, E. B., Cass, M., & Cooper, C. L. (2005). The relationship between job satisfaction and health: A meta-analysis. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 62(2), 105–112.

  31. Gallie, D. (2002). The polarization of the labour market and the exclusion of vulnerable groups. In K. Isaksson, C. Hogstedt, C. Eriksson, & T. Theorell (Eds.), Health effects of the new labour market (pp. 245–266). New York, NY, USA: Springer.

  32. Gambacorta, R., & Iannario, M. (2013). Measuring job satisfaction with CUB models. Labour, 27(2), 198–224.

  33. Gamero Burón, C. (2004). Satisfacción laboral de los asalariados en España. Especial referencia a las diferencias de género. Cuadernos de Economía, 27(74), 109–145.

  34. García-Serrano, C. (2008). Does size matter? The influence of firm size on working conditions and job satisfaction (No. 2008-30). ISER Working Paper Series.

  35. Gardner, J., & Oswald, A. (2002). How does education affect mental well-being and job satisfaction. Coventry: Economics Department Warwick University.

  36. Gottard, A., Iannario, M., & Piccolo, D. (2016). Varying uncertainty in CUB. Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, 10(2), 225–244.

  37. Green, F. (2006). Demanding work: The paradox of job quality in the affluent economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  38. Grund, C., & Sliwka, D. (2007). Reference-dependent preferences and the impact of wage increases on job satisfaction: Theory and evidence. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics JITE, 163(2), 313–335.

  39. Hamermesh, D. S. (2001). The changing distribution of job satisfaction. Journal of Human Resources, 36(1), 1–30.

  40. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. (1996). A cross-level investigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. Personnel Psychology, 49(2), 307–339.

  41. Honaker, J., & King, G. (2010). What to do about missing values in time-series cross-section data. American Journal of Political Science, 54(2), 561–581.

  42. Honaker, J., King, G., & Blackwell, M. (2015). Amelia II: A program for missing data. http://gking.harvard.edu/amelia.

  43. Iannario, M. (2009). Fitting measures for ordinal data models. Quaderni di Statistica, 11, 46–79.

  44. Iannario, M. (2010). On the identifiability of a mixture model for ordinal data. Metron, 68(1), 87–94.

  45. Iannario, M. (2012a). Modelling shelter choices in a class of mixture models for ordinal responses. Statistical Methods and Applications, 21(1), 1–22.

  46. Iannario, M. (2012b). CUBE models for interpreting ordered categorical data with overdispersion. Quaderni di Statistica, 14, 137–140.

  47. Iannario, M. (2014). Modelling uncertainty and overdispersion in ordinal data. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 43(4), 771–786.

  48. Iannario, M., & Piccolo, D. (2011). University teaching and students’ perception: Models of the evaluation process. In M. Attanasio & V. Capursi (Eds.), Statistical methods for the evaluation of university systems (pp. 93–112). Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.

  49. Iannario, M., & Piccolo, D. (2012a). CUB models: Statistical methods and empirical evidence. In R. S. Kenett & S. Salini (Eds.), Modern analysis of customer survey: With applications using R (pp. 232–254). New York: Wiley.

  50. Iannario, M., & Piccolo, D. (2012b). A model-based approach for quality assessment in opinion mining. In C. Perna & M. Sibillo (Eds.), Mathematical and statistical for acturial sciences and finance (pp. 237–244). Berlin: Springer.

  51. Iannario, M., & Piccolo, D. (2016). A generalized framework for modelling ordinal data. Statistical Methods and Applications, 25(2), 163–189.

  52. Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), 939.

  53. Kahneman, D., & Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(38), 16489–16493.

  54. Kalleberg, A. L. (2009). Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 1–22.

  55. Kalleberg, A. L., & Loscocco, K. A. (1983). Aging, values, and rewards: Explaining age differences in job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 48, 78–90.

  56. Kalleberg, A. L., & Sørensen, A. B. (1973). The measurement of the effects of overtraining on job attitudes. Sociological Methods & Research, 2(2), 215–238.

  57. Karasek, R. (1997). Labor participation and work quality policy: Requirements for an alternative economic future. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 23, 55–65.

  58. Kohn, M. L. (1989). Introduction. In M. L. Kohn (Ed.), Cross-national research in sociology. Newbury Park: Sage.

  59. Kulas, J. T., & Stachowski, A. A. (2009). Middle category endorsement in odd-numbered Likert response scales: Associated item characteristics, cognitive demands, and preferred meanings. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 489–493.

  60. Lallemand, T., Plasman, R., & Rycx, F. (2007). The establishment-size wage premium: Evidence from European countries. Empirica, 34(5), 427–451.

  61. Lévy-Garboua, L., & Montmarquette, C. (2004). Reported job satisfaction: What does it mean? The Journal of Socio-Economics, 33(2), 135–151.

  62. Little, R. J., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Bayes and multiple imputation. In R. J. Little & D. B. Rubin (Eds.), Statistical analysis with missing data (2nd ed., pp. 200–220). New York: Wiley.

  63. Livingstone, S. (2003). On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. European Journal of Communication, 18(4), 477–500.

  64. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

  65. Loscocco, K. A., & Roschelle, A. R. (1991). Influences on the quality of work and nonwork life: Two decades in review. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39(2), 182–225.

  66. McCullagh, P. (1980). Regression models for ordinal data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 42, 109–142.

  67. McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989). Log-linear models. In Generalized linear models (pp. 193–244). Springer US. 

  68. McLachlan, G., & Krishnan, T. (2007). The EM algorithm and extensions (Vol. 382). New York: Wiley.

  69. Millán, J. M., Hessels, J., Thurik, R., & Aguado, R. (2013). Determinants of job satisfaction: A European comparison of self-employed and paid employees. Small Business Economics, 40(3), 651–670.

  70. Molla, M. I. H. (2015). Ensuring job satisfaction for managing people at work. Global Disclosure of Economics and Business, 4(2), 155–166.

  71. Muñoz de Bustillo-Llorente, R. M., & Fernández-Macías, E. (2005). Job satisfaction as an indicator of the quality of work. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (Formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), 34(5), 656–673.

  72. Nelder, J., & Wedderburn, R. (1972). Generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 135(3), 370–384. doi:10.2307/2344614.

  73. O’Brien, G. E. (1986). Psychology of work and unemployment. New York: Wiley.

  74. OECD. (2014). OECD glossary of statistical terms—Composite leading indicator zones definition (stats.oecd.org).

  75. Oi, W. Y., & Idson, T. L. (1999). Firm size and wages. Handbook of Labor Economics, 3, 2165–2214.

  76. Oswald, A. (2002). Are you happy at work? Job satisfaction and work–life balance in the US and Europe. Warwick WBS Event, Warwick Hotel, New York, NY, 5.

  77. Oxenbridge, S., & Evesson, J. (2012). Young people entering work: A review of the research, Research Paper 18/12 ACAS.

  78. Parker, S. C. (2004). The economics of self-employment and entrepreneurship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  79. Peel, D., & McLachlan, G. J. (2000). Robust mixture modelling using the t distribution. Statistics and Computing, 10(4), 339–348.

  80. Perrone, V. (1977). The abuses of standardized testing. In D. W. Robinson (Ed.), Fastback Series 92. ERIC.

  81. Piccolo, D. (2003). On the moments of a mixture of uniform and shifted binomial random variables. Quaderni di Statistica, 5(1), 85–104.

  82. Piccolo, D. (2006). Observed information matrix for MUB models. Quaderni di Statistica, 8, 33–78.

  83. Piccolo, D. (2008). Modelling university students’ final grades by ordinal variables. Quaderni di Statistica, 10, 211–233.

  84. Rain, J. S., Lane, I. M., & Steiner, D. D. (1991). A current look at the job satisfaction/life satisfaction relationship: Review and future considerations. Human Relations, 44(3), 287–307.

  85. Renaud, S. (2002). Rethinking the union membership/job satisfaction relationship: Some empirical evidence in Canada. International Journal of Manpower, 23(2), 137–150.

  86. Rice, R. W., Near, J. P., & Hunt, R. G. (1980). The job-satisfaction/life-satisfaction relationship: A review of empirical research. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1(1), 37–64.

  87. Ritter, J. A., & Anker, R. (2002). Good jobs, bad jobs: Workers’ evaluations in five countries. International Labour Review, 141(4), 331–358.

  88. Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for non-response in surveys. New York: Wiley.

  89. Salminen, S. (1995). Does pressure from the work community increase risk taking? Psychological Reports, 77((3_suppl)), 1247–1250.

  90. Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

  91. Schafer, J. L., & Olsen, M. K. (1998). Multiple imputation for multivariate missing-data problems: A data analyst’s perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33(4), 545–571.

  92. Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P., & Lee, D. J. (2001). A new measure of quality of work life (QWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Social Indicators Research, 55(3), 241–302.

  93. Sloane, P. J., & Williams, H. (2000). Job satisfaction, comparison earnings, and gender. Labour, 14(3), 473–502.

  94. Sousa-Poza, A., & Sousa-Poza, A. A. (2000). Well-being at work: A cross-national analysis of the levels and determinants of job satisfaction. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 29(6), 517–538.

  95. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences (Vol. 3). Beverley Hills: Sage Publications.

  96. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  97. Van Praag, B. M. S. (1993). The relativity of the welfare concept, 363–392 in M. Nussbaum and A Sen (eds.), The Quality of Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 362–385.

  98. Veenhoven, R. (2000). The four qualities of life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1(1), 1–39.

  99. Weightman, J. (1999). Managing people. London: Institute of Personnel and Development House, Camp Road.

  100. Wilczynska, A., Batorski, D., & Sellens, J. T. (2014). Employment flexibility, job security and job satisfaction of knowledge workers in Poland. IN3 Working Paper Series.

  101. Winkelmann, L., & Winkelmann, R. (1998). Why are the unemployed so unhappy? Evidence from panel data. Economica, 65(257), 1–15.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Gennaro Punzo.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Tables 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7.

Table 3 List of variables
Table 4 Weighted descriptive statistics: France and Germany
Table 5 Weighted descriptive statistics: Italy and the United Kingdom
Table 6 Multivariate frequency distribution of job satisfaction by subgroups: France and Germany
Table 7 Multivariate frequency distribution of job satisfaction by subgroups: Italy and the UK

Appendix 2

See Figs. 2, 3, 4 and 5.

Fig. 2
figure2

CUB(0, 0) of global job satisfaction by country

Fig. 3
figure3

Estimated CUB(0, 0) models of global job satisfaction by country for gender, age groups, earnings groups, and enterprise size

Fig. 4
figure4

Estimated CUB(0, 0) models of components of socio-economical dimension by country

Fig. 5
figure5

Estimated CUB(0, 0) models of components of working condition dimension by country

Appendix 3

Data Quality: Multiple Imputation Through Amelia II

Item non-responses (don’t know and refusal) are ubiquitous in most quantitative research studies, and the 2010 EWCS dataset is not immune to the problem. The percentages of item non-responses by country are quite negligible—1.4% for France, less than 1% for Germany, 1.6% for Italy and the United Kingdom. However, if each unit with at least one missing value had been deleted, a large number of observations would have been lost—33.8% for France, 24.9% for Germany, 40.6% for Italy and 45.3% for the United Kingdom—with unavoidable effects on the conclusions that could be drawn from the data.

Therefore, after having removed the very few missing values (less than 1% for each country) on the question concerning the global job satisfaction (see footnote 2), we take up the strategy of multiple imputation (Honaker and King 2010) through the Amelia II’s EMB (Expectation–Maximization with Bootstrapping) algorithm implemented by Honaker et al. (2015). Multiple imputation (Rubin 1987; Little and Rubin 2002)—known as the gold standard of treating missing data (Baraldi and Enders 2010; Cheema 2014)—assures data quality without losing too many observations and avoids biases, inefficiencies and incorrect uncertainty estimates that can result from the deletion instead.

The imputation model in Amelia II assumes that the complete dataset D (both observed D obs and unobserved D mis) has:

  • A multivariate normal distribution:

    $$D \sim N_{k} \left( {\mu , \varSigma } \right)$$
    (9)
  • The unobserved data are missing at random (MAR).

The first hypothesis is often an approximation to the true distribution of data, even though this method works as well as other more complicated models even in the face of categorical or mixed data (Schafer 1997; Schafer and Olsen 1998). The second one means that the pattern of missingness only depends on the observed part (\(D^{obs}\)), not the unobserved data \((D^{mis} )\). Let M be the binary missingness matrix, which indicates the presence of missing values with 1 (and 0 otherwise), the MAR assumption is:

$$P\left( {M |D} \right) = P(M|D^{obs} )$$
(10)

The vector of parameters \(\theta = \left( {\mu ,\varSigma } \right)\) determines the data distribution that, under the MAR assumption, it can be factorised as follows:

$$P\left( {D^{obs} ,M |\theta } \right) = P\left( {M |D^{obs} } \right) P (D^{obs} |\theta )$$
(11)

The parameters \(\theta\) are estimable through the likelihood function:

$$L\left( {\theta ,D^{obs} } \right) \propto P (D^{obs} |\theta )$$
(12)

Supposing a flat prior on \(\theta\), the posterior function is rewritten as:

$$P\left( {\theta ,D^{obs} } \right) \propto P (D^{obs} |\theta ) = \smallint P\left( {D|\theta } \right)dD^{mis}$$
(13)

This posterior function is solved through the EMB algorithm that combines the classic EM algorithm (Dempster et al. 1977) with a bootstrap approach to take draws from this posterior. From the posterior of the complete-data parameters, imputations are made by drawing values of \(D^{mis}\) from its distribution conditional on \(D^{obs}\) and the draws of \(\theta\), which is a linear regression with parameters that can be calculated directly from \(\theta\) (Honaker et al. 2015).

In brief, what Amelia does is imputing m values for each missing data and creating m five new complete datasets. As suggested by Honaker et al. (2015), being a few missing data, we chose \(m = 5\), and without affecting generality, one of the five datasets (the fourth) was selected randomly to avoid the complexity of merging imputed values from the five datasets given that most are categorical variables.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Punzo, G., Castellano, R. & Buonocore, M. Job Satisfaction in the “Big Four” of Europe: Reasoning Between Feeling and Uncertainty Through CUB Models. Soc Indic Res 139, 205–236 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1715-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Job satisfaction
  • CUB models
  • European countries

JEL Classification

  • C25
  • J28
  • O52