Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 1149–1171 | Cite as

Construct Overlap Between Employee Engagement and Job Satisfaction: A Function of Semantic Equivalence?

  • Kim NimonEmail author
  • Brad Shuck
  • Drea Zigarmi
Research Paper


The evidence for employee engagement as a distinct construct, separate from related work attitudes such as job satisfaction, has been contradictory. Despite a growing inventory of research, current statistical techniques fall short in providing additional answers beyond those previously documented through discriminant and incremental validity, among others. Understanding the semantic similarity between scales however could uncover the potential bounds of current evidence and highlight areas of further exploration. This study examined the semantic similarity between three measures of employee engagement frequently found in the research literature and a commonly used measure of job satisfaction. Examining a relatively new indicator of validity, manifest validity, semantic relatedness between items from employee engagement and job satisfaction instruments was assessed using latent semantic analysis. Semantic similarity between employee engagement and job satisfaction items predicted moderate to high amounts of variance (R 2 = 25–69 %) in corresponding correlations of survey responses. Findings suggest that high correlations between certain employee engagement measures and job satisfaction scores may be a function of semantic equivalence rather than individual perceptions of separate theoretical constructs.


Latent sematic analysis Employee engagement Job satisfaction 



The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable insights, comments, and questions.


  1. Albrecht, S. (2010). Handbook of employee engagement. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnulf, J. K., Larsen, K. R., Martinsen, Ø. L., & Bong, C. H. (2014). Predicting survey responses: How and why semantics shape survey statistics on organizational behaviour. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e106361. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106361 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bellegarda, J. R. (1998). A multispan language modeling framework for large vocabulary speech recognition. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, 6, 456–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35, 307–311. doi: 10.1037/h0055617 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 3, 297–307.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, S. P., & Leigh, T. W. (1996). A new look at psychological climate and its relationship to job involvement, effort, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 358–368. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.358 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, G. D, Jr, & Klesh, J. R. (1983). Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members. In S. E. Seashore, E. E. Lawler III, P. H. Mirvis, & C. Cammann (Eds.), Assessing organizational change: A guide to methods, measures, and practices (pp. 71–138). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89–136. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooper-Hakim, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The construct of work commitment: Testing an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 241–259. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.2.241 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cooper-Thomas, H. D., Leighton, N., Xu, J., Knight-Turvey, N., & Albrecht, S. (2010). Measuring change: Does engagement flourish, fade, or stay true. Handbook of employee engagement. doi: 10.4337/9781849806374.00013
  11. de Bruin, G. P., & Henn, C. M. (2013). Dimensionality of the nine-item Utrecht Work Engagement scale (UWES-9). Psychological Reports: Human Resources & Marketing, 112, 1–12. doi: 10.2466/01.03.PRO.112.3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dennis, S. (2011). How to use the LSA Web site. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent semantic analysis (pp. 57–70). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  14. Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2011). An R companion to applied regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Furnas, G. W., Landauer, T. K., Gomez, L. M., & Dumais, S. T. (1987). The vocabularly problem in human-system communication. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 30, 964–971. doi: 10.1145/32206.32212 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  17. Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L. (2006). How important are job attitudes? Meta-analytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. The Academy of Management Journal, 49, 305–325. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2006.20786077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 268–279. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.268 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579. doi: 10.1126/science.298.5598.1569 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ho, V. T., Wong, 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00870X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Judge, T. A., & Illies, R. (2004). Affect and job satisfaction: A study of their relationship at work and home. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 661–673. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.661 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kahn, W. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724. doi: 10.2307/256287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kline, P. (1979). Psychometrics and psychology. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  24. Landauer, T. K. (2011). LSA as a theory of meaning. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent semantic analysis (pp. 71–88). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Larsen, K., Nevo, D., & Rich, E. (2008). Exploring the semantic validity of questionnaire scales. In Proceedings of the 41st annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10). Waikoloa, HI.Google Scholar
  26. Lawler, E. E., & Hall, D. T. (1970). Relationship of job characteristics to job involvement, satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54, 305–312. doi: 10.1037/h0029692 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ley, P. (2007). Quantitative aspects of psychological assessments. Retrieved from
  28. 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
  29. Luthans, F., Zhu, W., & Avolio, B. J. (2006). The impact of efficacy on work attitudes across cultures. Journal of World Business, 41, 121–132. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martin, D. I., & Berry, M. W. (2011). Mathematical foundations behind latent semantic analysis. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent semantic analysis (pp. 35–56). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.01258 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mathieu, J. E., & Farr, J. L. (1991). Further evidence for the discriminant validity of measures of organizational commitment, job involvement, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 127–133. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.76.1.127 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meyer, J. K., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three complement conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 64–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Newman, D. A., Joseph, D. L., & Hulin, C. L. (2010). Job attitudes and employee engagement: considering the attitude “A-factor”. In S. L. Albrecht (Ed.), The handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research, and practice (pp. 43–61). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  36. Newman, D. A., Joseph, D. L., Sparkman, T. E., & Carpenter, N. C. (2011). Invited reaction: The work cognition inventory: Initial evidence of construct validity. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 37–47. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.20065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nimon, K., Zigarmi, D., Houson, D., Witt, D., & Diehl, J. (2011). The work cognition inventory: Initial evidence of construct validity. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 7–35. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.20064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parker, S. K., & Griffin, M. A. (2011). Understanding active psychological states: Embedding engagement in a wider nomological net and closer attention to performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 60–67. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2010.532869 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Quesada, J. (2011). Creating your own LSA spaces. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent semantic analysis (pp. 71–88). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Quinn, R. P., & Shepard, L. J. (1974). Quality of employee survey. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.Google Scholar
  41. Rehder, B., Schreiner, M. E., Wolfe, M. B., Laham, D., Landauer, T. K., & Kintsch, W. (1998). Using latent semantic analysis to assess knowledge: Some technical considerations. Discourse Processes, 25, 337–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rich, B., LePine, J., & Crawford, E. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617–635. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2010.51468988 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rigg, J. (2013). Worthwhile concept or old wine? A review of employee engagement and related constructs. American Journal of Business and Management, 2, 31–36. doi: 10.11634/216796061302229 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 655–684. doi: 10.2307/3094827i CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (1999). Core affect, prototypical emotional episodes, and other things called emotion: Dissecting the elephant. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 805–819. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.5.805 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600–619. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2010.51468988 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). Test manual for the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Unpublished manuscript, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Retrieved from
  48. Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701–716. doi: 10.1177/0013164405282471 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1996). Maslach burnout inventory-general survey. In C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), The Maslach burnout inventory-test manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  50. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92. doi: 10.1023/A:1015630930326 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shirom, A. (2003). Feeling vigorous at work? The construct of vigor in the study of positive affect in organizations. In D. Ganster & P. L. Perrewe (Eds.), Research in organizational stress and well-being (Vol. 3, pp. 135–165). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  52. Shuck, B., Ghosh, R., Zigarmi, D., & Nimon, K. (2013). The jingle jangle of employee engagement: Further exploration of the emerging construct & implications for workplace learning and performance. Human Resource Development Review, 12, 11–35. doi: 10.1177/1534484312463921 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shuck, B., Nimon, K., & Zigarmi, D. (2014). Employee engagement and HRD: Exploring the philosophical underpinnings, measurement, and interventions. In N. E. Chalofsky, T. S. Rocco, & M. L. Morris (Eds.), The handbook of human resource development: The discipline and the profession (pp. 605–622). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  54. Shuck, B., & Reio, T. (2013). Employee engagement and wellbeing: A moderation model and implications for practice. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1177/1548051813494240
  55. Shuck, B., Reio, T., & Rocco, T. (2011). Employee engagement: An antecedent and outcome approach to model development. Human Resource Development International, 14, 427–445. doi: 10.1080/13678868.2011.601587 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vallerand, R. J., Blancard, C., Mageau, G. A., Loestner, R., Leonard, C. R., Leonard, M., et al. (2003). Les Passions de l’Ame: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 757.Google Scholar
  57. Wefald, A. J., & Downey, R. G. (2009). Construct dimensionality of engagement and its relationship with satisfaction. Journal of Psychology, 143, 91–111. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.143.1.91-112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wefald, A. J., Mills, M. J., & Smith, M. R. (2011). A comparison of three job engagement measures: Examining their factorial and criterion-related validity. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 4, 67–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2011.01059.X Google Scholar
  59. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 183–200. doi: 10.1348/096317908X285633 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yalabik, Y. Z., Popaitoon, P., Chowne, J. A., & Rayton, B. A. (2013). Work engagement as a mediator between employee attitudes and outcomes. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24, 2799–2823. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.763844 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zientek, L. R., & Thompson, B. (2009). Matrix summaries improve research reports: Secondary analyses using published literature. Educational Researcher, 38, 343–352. doi: 10.3102/0013189X09339056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zigarmi, D., Nimon, K., Houson, D., Witt, D., & Diehl, D. (2011). A preliminary field test of an employee work passion model. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 195–221. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.20076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zigarmi, D., Nimon, K., & Shuck, B. (2014). Employee engagement: Job attitude or mediator between job attitudes and affect? In D. Chapman & K. Guerdat (Eds.), Proceedings of the Academy of Human Resource Development 2014 international research conference in the America’s. AHRD: Houston, TX.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Texas at TylerTylerUSA
  2. 2.College of Education and Human DevelopmentUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  3. 3.The Ken Blanchard CompaniesEscondidoUSA

Personalised recommendations