Skip to main content

A Content Validation of Work Passion: Was the Passion Ever There?

Journal of Business and Psychology (2022)Cite this article

Abstract

Work passion research most frequently utilizes the dualistic model of passion, which asserts two types of passion that differ based on the internalization of passion into one’s identity: harmonious (adaptive) and obsessive (maladaptive) passion. While interest in work passion is exponentially increasing, scholars have recently pointed out concerns regarding the content validity of the most commonly used measure of the dualistic model of work passion, The Passion Scale. To address these questions, we conduct a content validation of The Passion Scale employing recent best practices in content validation research. Specifically, we examine the degree of content validity of the focal constructs (i.e., the facets of work passion), as well as the distinctiveness of the focal constructs from orbiting constructs (i.e., related but conceptually and empirically distinct constructs), such as work engagement and workaholism. The findings of this research highlight several areas for improvement regarding the content validity of The Passion Scale. Additionally, we include a pool of sample items that could be used to create a revised scale. Implications and future directions for work passion research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Notes

  1. It should be noted that the positive emotions facet of harmonious passion and the negative emotions facet of obsessive passion were mentioned in 3 of the 7 (42.86%) articles we reviewed. To ensure thoroughness, we included these facets in our content validation. All other facets for harmonious and obsessive passion were mentioned in all 7 articles except: significant part of identity (harmonious passion; 6 of 7); harmony (harmonious passion; 6 of 7); controls individual (obsessive passion; 6 of 7); conflicts with other activities (6 of 7).

  2. The 2010 measure also includes a “passion criteria” subscale consisting of four items which assess whether someone is passionate or not. We view this as external to the dualistic model of passion and thus did not include it in our content validation.

  3. The explanation given regarding this discrepancy (Vallerand, 2010, pg. 107) states “the original passion scale (Vallerand et al., 2003) consisted in two 7-item subscales. A slightly revised scale consisting of 6-item scales is now used. These subscales correlate very highly with their respective original subscale (r = 0.80 and above) and yield the same findings with determinants and outcomes. In addition, we have used a 3-item version (Vallerand et al., 2007) and even a 1-item version (Philippe & Vallerand, 2007) of each subscale with much success.”

  4. Percentages sum to > 100% as participants were instructed to select all that apply.

  5. These two orbiting constructs were paired together based on their large number of facets and to ensure participants received an equal distribution of focal and orbiting constructs.

  6. Although we intentionally modeled our methodology after Colquitt et al.’s (2019), we would like to echo Colquitt et al.’s word of caution in that the htc and htd may be impacted by a number of variables, such as the number of anchors chosen, the wording of anchors, number of judges, and type of judges.

  7. While Colquitt et al.’s (2019) cutoffs were established using a large sample (N = 2119), it is worth noting that these cutoffs were establish relative to 112 scales. Thus, over time, these values may be updated as more studies are conducted and/or are refined in the context of a specific variable (i.e., work passion).

  8. The extent to which this is considered contamination could be debated given the overlapping content in the definitions of work meaningfulness and the value/meaning facet of work passion.

References

  • Aguinis, H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2014). An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure: Improving research quality before data collection. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 569–595. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, N. A., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1991). Predicting the performance of measures in a confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 732–740. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.5.732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barsade, S. G., & Gibson, D. E. (2007). Why does affect matter in organizations? Academy of Management Perspectives, 21, 36–59. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2007.24286163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkeland, I. K., & Buch, R. (2015). The dualistic model of passion for work: Discriminate and predictive validity with work engagement and workaholism. Motivation and Emotion, 39, 392–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-014-9462-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bokrantz, J., Skoogh, A., Berlin, C., & Stahre, J. (2020). Smart maintenance: Instrument development, content validation and an empirical pilot. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 40, 481–506. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-11-2019-0746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J., Astakhova, M. N., & Hang, H. (2015). Work passion through the lens of culture: Harmonious work passion, obsessive work passion, and work outcomes in Russia and China. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 457–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9375-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carbonneau, N., Vallerand, R. J., Fernet, C., & Guay, F. (2008). The role of passion for teaching in intrapersonal and interpersonal outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 977. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardon, M. S., Gregoire, D. A., Stevens, C. E., & Patel, P. C. (2013). Measuring entrepreneurial passion: Conceptual foundations and scale validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 28, 373–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2011). Applied psychology in human resource management. Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, P., Lee, F., & Lim, S. (2020a). Loving thy work: Developing a measure of work passion. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(1), 140–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S. K., King, D. D., & Oswald, F. L. (2020b). Understanding how resilience is measured in the organizational sciences. Human Performance, 33, 130–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2020.1744151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, S., Carpenter, N. C., & Zhang, B. (2020). An item-level investigation of conceptual and empirical distinctiveness of proactivity constructs. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 28, 337–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. B. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (2019). Constructing validity: New developments in creating objective measuring instruments. Psychological Assessment, 31(12), 1412–1427. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000626.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, M. A., Smith, R. W., & Haynes, N. J. (2020). The multidimensional workaholism scale: Linking the conceptualization and measurement of workaholism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105, 1281–1307. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Sabey, T. B., Rodell, J. B., & Hill, E. T. (2019). Content validation guidelines: Evaluation criteria for definitional correspondence and definitional distinctiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104, 1243–1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Credé, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2017). Much ado about grit: a meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 492–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culpepper, R. A. (2000). A test of revised scales for the Meyer and Allen (1991) three-component commitment construct. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(4), 604–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curran, T., Hill, A. P., Appleton, P. R., Vallerand, R. J., & Standage, M. (2015). The psychology of passion: A meta-analytical review of a decade of research on intrapersonal outcomes. Motivation and Emotion, 39, 631–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-015-9503-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalla Rosa, A., & Vianello, M. (2020). Linking calling with workaholism: Examining obsessive and harmonious passion as mediators and moderators. Journal of Career Assessment, 28, 589–607. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072720909039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forest, J., Mageau, G. A., Sarrazin, C., & Morin, E. M. (2011). “Work is my passion”: The different affective, behavioural, and cognitive consequences of harmonious and obsessive passion toward work. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28, 27–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guion, R. M. (2011). Assessment, measurement, and prediction for personnel decisions. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T. (2018). I asked 5,000 people how they stay passionate at work – Here’s what I found. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/i-asked-5000-people-how-they-stay-passionate-at-work-2018-1.

  • Hedges, K. (2017). Let’s get real about passion at work. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/work-in-progress/2017/06/28/lets-get-real-about-passion-at-work/#50f79f3d3c23.

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R., & Tracey, J. B. (1999). An analysis of variance approach to content validation. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819922004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, V. T., & Astakhova, M. N. (2018). Disentangling passion and engagement: An examination of how and when passionate employees become engaged ones. Human Relations, 71, 973–1000. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726717731505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, V. T., & Astakhova, M. N. (2020). The passion bug: How and when do leaders inspire work passion? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41, 424–444. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, V. T., Wong, S.-S., & Lee, C. H. (2011). A tale of passion: Linking job passion and cognitive engagement to employee work performance. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 26–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00878.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idaszak, J. R., & Drasgow, F. (1987). A revision of the Job Diagnostic Survey: Elimination of a measurement artifact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 69–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kong, D. T., & Ho, V. T. (2018). The performance implication of obsessive work passion: Unpacking the moderating and mediating mechanisms from a conservation of resources perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27, 269–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, C. T., Oldham, G. R., & Langner, P. H. (1988). Measurement of job characteristics: Comparison of the original and the revised Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 462–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lajom, J. A. L., Amarnani, R. K., Restubog, S. L. D., Bordia, P., & Tang, R. L. (2018). Dualistic passion for work and its impact on career outcomes: Scale validation and nomological network. Journal of Career Assessment, 26, 631–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., Zhang, J., Shao, B., & Chen, C. (2019). A latent profile analysis of work passion: Structure, antecedent, and outcomes. Personnel Review, 49, 846–863. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-04-2019-0145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., & Strother, A. N. (2020). Psychological measurement and the replication crisis: Four sacred cows. Canadian Psychology, 61, 281–288. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodahl, T. M., & Kejnar, M. (1965). The definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49(1), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Vallerand, R. J., Lafrenière, M. A. K., Parker, P., Morin, A. J., Carbonneau, N., et al. (2013). Passion: Does one scale fit all? Construct validity of two-factor passion scale and psychometric invariance over different activities and languages. Psychological Assessment, 25(3), 796–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palan, S., & Schitter, C. (2018). Prolific.ac - A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 17, 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bef.2017.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paullay, I. M., Alliger, G. M., & Stone-Romero, E. F. (1994). Construct validation of two instruments designed to measure job involvement and work centrality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(2), 224–228. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.2.224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peer, E., Brandimarte, L., Samat, S., & Acquisti, A. (2017). Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfattheicher, S., Geiger, M., Hartung, J., Weiss, S., & Schindler, S. (2017). Old wine in new bottles? The case of self-compassion and neuroticism. European Journal of Personality, 31(2), 160–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philippe, F., & Vallerand, R. J. (2007). Prevalence rates of gambling problems in Montreal, Canada: A look at old adults and the role of passion. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23, 275–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-006-9038-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, J. M., Ho, V. T., O’Boyle, E. H., & Kirkman, B. L. (2020). Passion at work: A meta-analysis of individual work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41, 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbusch, H., Wanders, F., & Pit, I. L. (2020). The Semantic Scale Network: An online tool to detect semantic overlap of psychological scales and prevent scale redundancies. Psychological Methods, 25(3), 380–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnackenberg, A. K., Tomlinson, E. C., & Coen, C. A. (in press). The dimensional structure of transparency: A construct validation of transparency as disclosure, clarity, and accuracy in organizations. Human Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720933317.

  • Schriesheim, C. A., Powers, K. J., Scandura, T. A., Gardiner, C. C., & Lankau, M. J. (1993). Improving construct measurement in management research: Comments and a quantitative approach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and-pencil survey-type instruments. Journal of Management, 19(2), 385–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, R. B., Ashby, J. S., & Trippi, J. (1995). Perfectionism: Its measurement and career relevance. Journal of Career Assessment, 3, 279–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, R. B., Rice, K. G., Mobley, M., Trippi, J., & Ashby, J. S. (2001). The revised almost perfect scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(3), 130–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The work and meaning inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 322–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tóth-Király, I., Bõthe, B., Rigó, A., & Orosz, G. (2017). An illustration of the exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) framework on the passion scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallerand, R. J. (2010). On passion for life activities: The dualistic model of passion. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 42 (p. 97–193). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(10)42003-1.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vallerand, R. J., Salvy, S. J., Mageau, G. A., Elliot, A. J., Denis, P. L., Grouzet, F. M., & Blanchard, C. (2007). On the role of passion in performance. Journal of Personality, 75(3), 505–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallerand, R. J., & Houlfort, N. (Eds.). (2019). Passion for work: Theory, research, and applications. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallerand, R. J., Paquet, Y., Philippe, F. L., & Charest, J. (2010). On the role of passion for work in burnout: A process model. Journal of Personality, 78(1), 289–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallerand, R. J., Blanchard, C., Mageau, G. A., Koestner, R., Ratelle, C., Léonard, M., Gagné, M., & Marsolais, J. (2003). Les passions de l’âme: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 756–767. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.756.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, K., & Gordon, J. R. (2008). Creating an individual work identity. Human Resource Management Review, 18(1), 46–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, S. L., Seibert, S. E., Goering, D., & O’Boyle, E. H. (2019). A tale of two sample sources: Do results from online panel data and conventional data converge? Journal of Business and Psychology, 34, 425–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 1–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of job performance and voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 486–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zickar, M. J. (2020). Measurement development and evaluation. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 7, 213–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Louisiana State University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, USA

    Rachel Williamson Smith

  2. Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA

    Hanyi Min

  3. University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Matthew A. Ng

  4. Anthem, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA

    Nicholas J. Haynes

  5. University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

    Malissa A. Clark

Authors
  1. Rachel Williamson Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hanyi Min
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthew A. Ng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nicholas J. Haynes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Malissa A. Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachel Williamson Smith.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, R.W., Min, H., Ng, M.A. et al. A Content Validation of Work Passion: Was the Passion Ever There?. J Bus Psychol (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09807-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09807-1

Keywords

  • Work passion
  • Content validation