Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 1–18 | Cite as

Authenticity at Work: Development and Validation of an Individual Authenticity Measure at Work

  • Ralph van den Bosch
  • Toon W. Taris
Research Paper


Building on the work by Barrett-Lennard (Carl Rogers’ helping system: Journey & substance. Sage, London 1998) and Wood et al. (J Couns Psychol 55:385–399 2008), this study describes the development and validation of a theory-based measure of state authenticity at work, the Individual Authenticity Measure at Work (IAM Work). Even though this construct is obviously relevant to the work context (e.g., as regards issues of work relations, leadership and well-being), none of the instruments currently available focuses on authenticity in the area of work and organizational psychology. A total sample of 646 participants was divided in two equal sized subsamples. Exploratory factor analysis supported the underlying tripartite construct of authenticity at work, resulting in the subscales authentic living, self-alienation, and accepting external influences. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the tripartite construct and showed good psychometric properties of the state-focused measure of authenticity at work. Finally, correlation analysis showed that each subscale and the total score of authenticity was positively related to commonly used work outcomes such as job satisfaction, in-role performance, and work engagement. This study concludes that the IAM Work is a reliable and valid measure of state authenticity at work. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.


Authenticity at work Scale development Validation Positive psychology 


  1. Arbuckle, J. L. (2007). AMOS 18.0 [computer software]. Chicago: SPSS.Google Scholar
  2. Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1998). Carl Rogers’ helping system: Journey & substance. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61, 1139–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentler, P. M. (2005). EQS 6 [computer manual]. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
  5. Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. J. C. (2002). EQS for windows: User’s guide. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
  6. Boucher, H. C. (2011). The dialectical self-concept II: Cross-role and within-role consistency, well-being, self-certainty, and authenticity. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42, 1251–1271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brewer, G. A. (2005). In the eye of the storm: Frontline supervisors and federal agency performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 505–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunell, A. B., Kernis, M. H., Goldman, B. M., Heppner, W., Davis, P., Cascio, E. V., et al. (2010). Dispositional authenticity and romantic relationship functioning. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 900–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalMethods, 1, 16–29.Google Scholar
  12. De Beurs, E., Van Dyck, R., Marquenie, L. A., Lange, A., & Blonk, R. W. B. (2001). The depression anxiety stress scales: A questionnaire for measuring depression, anxiety and stress [in Dutch]. Gedragstherapie, 34, 35–53.Google Scholar
  13. Erickson, R. J. (1994). Our society, our selves: Becoming authentic in an inauthentic world. Advanced Development, 6, 27–39.Google Scholar
  14. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person-organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 254–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grandey, A., Foo, S. C., Groth, M., & Goodwin, R. E. (2012). Free to be you and me: A climate of authenticity alleviates burnout from emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hannah, S. T., Walumbwa, F. O., & Fry, L. W. (2011). Leadership in action teams: Team leader and members’ authenticity, authenticity strength, and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 64, 771–802.Google Scholar
  18. Harter, S. (2002). Authenticity. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 382–394). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hu, L. T., Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted? Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jung, H. J. (2011). Why be authentic? Psychological underpinnings of authenticity among baby boomers in the United States. Ethos, 29, 279–299.Google Scholar
  21. Karasek, R., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., & Amick, B. (1998). The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): An instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 322–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kernis, M. H., & Goldman, B. M. (2006). A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity: Theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 283–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kristensen, T. F., & Borg, V. (2003). Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ). Copenhagen: AMI.Google Scholar
  25. Lopez, F. G., & Rice, K. G. (2006). Preliminary development and validation of a measure of relationship authenticity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 362–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1995). Manual for the depression anxiety stress scales (2nd ed.). Sydney: Psychology Foundation.Google Scholar
  27. Ménard, J., & Brunet, L. (2011). Authenticity and well-being in the workplace: A mediation model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26, 331–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Neff, K. D., & Suizzo, M. (2006). Culture, power, authenticity and psychological well-being within romantic relationships: A comparison of European American and Mexican Americans. Cognitive Development, 21, 441–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. O’Conner, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pejtersen, J. H., Kristensen, T. S., Borg, V., & Bjorner, J. B. (2010). The second version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 38, 8–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rogelberg, S. G., Leach, D. J., Warr, P. B., & Burnfield, J. L. (2006). “Not another meeting!”: Are meeting time demands related to employee well-being? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 86–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rogers, C. R. (1965). The concept of the fully functioning person. Pastoral Psychology, 16, 21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1988). Scaling corrections for Chi square statistics in covariance structure analysis. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, 1, 308–313.Google Scholar
  35. Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (2002). Assessing the Big Five: Applications of 10 psychometric criteria to the development of marker scales. Big Five Assessment (29-58). Göttingen: Hogrefe& Huber.Google Scholar
  36. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). The conceptualization and measurement of work engagement. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 10–24). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  37. Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2003). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schmid, P. F. (2005). Authenticity and alienation: Towards an understanding of the person beyond the categories of order and disorder. In S. Joseph & R. Worsley (Eds.), Person-centred psychopathology (pp. 75–90). Ross-on-Wye (UK): PCCS.Google Scholar
  39. Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Rawsthorne, L. J., & Ilardi, B. (1997). Trait self and true self: Cross-role variation in the Big-Five personality traits and its relations with psychological authenticity and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1380–1393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Spitzmuller, M., & Ilies, R. (2010). Do they [all] see my true self? Leader’s relational authenticity and followers’ assessments of transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 304–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Toor, S., & Ofori, G. (2009). Authenticity and its influence on psychological well-being and contingent self-esteem of leaders in Singapore construction sector. Construction Management and Economics, 27, 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Velicer, W. F., Eaton, C. A., & Fava, J. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A review and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. In R. D. Goffin & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: Honoring Douglas Jackson at Seventy (pp. 41–71). Boston: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, W. L., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34, 89–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are single-item measures? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 247–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. White, N. (2011). An examination of dispositional authenticity. Arizona: Arizona State University.Google Scholar
  47. Wood, A. M., Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Baliousis, M., & Joseph, S. (2008). The authentic personality: A theoretical and empirical conceptualization and the development of the authenticity scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 385–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26, 179–201.Google Scholar
  49. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2007). The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 14, 121–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  51. Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Factor influencing five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Work and Organizational PsychologyUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Research and Organizational DevelopmentDilemmaFoundationZwolleThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations