Core self-evaluations: A review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job performance

Over the past five years there has been a growing body of literature that examines the relationships among some of psychology’s most studied traits (Neuroticism, self-esteem, and locus of control). Core self-evaluation theory posits a conceptual and empirical relationship between these traits and job satisfaction. After briefly reviewing core selfevaluation theory, we examine the empirical evidence documenting a relationship between these traits and the two central criteria of interest to I/O psychologists—job satisfaction and job performance. We then examine the relationship between core self-evaluation traits and the Big Five personality traits. We conclude with a discussion of the contributions and limitations of core self-evaluation research and opportunities for future research. Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. In 1997, Judge, Locke, and Durham published a conceptual paper linking an integrative personality trait—termed core self-evaluations—to job satisfaction. In the five years since the publication of that paper, more than a dozen core self-evaluation studies have been conducted, addressing issues ranging from the construct validity of the trait to its role in explaining and predicting job satisfaction and job performance. Amir Erez, Ed Locke, Carl Thoresen, and the authors of this paper have conducted a focused program of research, which will be reviewed in this paper. We begin by reviewing the theoretical foundations of core self-evaluation research and summarizing empirical findings. Next, we discuss the construct validity of the trait and its relationship to the Big Five. We conclude with an appraisal of the state of this research literature and an agenda for future research. ORIGINS AND NATURE OF CORE SELF-EVALUATIONS The original purpose of the Judge et al. (1997) article was to formulate propositions regarding dispositional factors that affect job satisfaction. In doing so, the paper drew from Received 30 July 2002 Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 2 December 2002 *Correspondence to: Joyce E. Bono, Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA. E-mail: jbono@umn.edu. eight diverse literatures (philosophy, clinical psychology research, clinical psychology practice, job satisfaction research, stress research, child development theory, personality theory, and social psychology) to introduce the concept of ‘core evaluations’ as an integrating principle for understanding the personological bases of job satisfaction. Judge et al. (1997) suggest that core evaluations are fundamental, bottom-line evaluations that individuals hold about themselves, the world, and others. According to Judge et al., coreevaluations influence people’s appraisal of themselves, the world and others, and do so subconsciously. Thus, situation specific appraisals (for example the evaluation of one’s work or one’s colleagues) are affected by these deeper and more fundamental selfappraisals, even though most people are not aware of the influence their self-evaluations have on their perceptions or behaviour as they occur. Although individuals may have core evaluations in multiple domains (e.g. evaluations of self, evaluations of others, evaluations of the world), early work on core evaluations (Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, 1998) demonstrated that core self-evaluations were the most important. In their initial formulation of the core self-evaluation concept, Judge et al. (1997) searched the literature for traits that met three criteria: self-evaluative (core traits should involve self-evaluation as opposed to description of oneself or others), fundamentality (core traits should be fundamental as opposed to surface traits; Cattell, 1965), and scope (core traits should be wide in scope or cardinal traits; Allport, 1961). Judge and colleagues identified three traits that clearly met these criteria: self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, and neuroticism. Additionally, they suggested that locus of control might also qualify. Subsequent core self-evaluation research has focused mostly on these four traits. However, Judge et al. (1997) also discussed the possibility that other traits might be considered as indicators of core self-evaluations. Specifically, they discussed dispositional optimism and positive and negative affectivity. There is some evidence that dispositional optimism (Judge et al., 1998b) and negative affectivity (Judge & Heller, 2002) are indicators of the core self-evaluation concept. Little systematic research has been done, however, to integrate these additional traits with core self-evaluations. Whereas it is possible other traits might also be included in the core self-evaluation construct, the bulk of the research to date has focused on self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, neuroticism, and locus of control. Conceptual similarities among the four core traits Three of these four traits appear to be the most widely studied in psychology (Judge & Bono, 2001a). Collectively, self-esteem, locus of control, and neuroticism (or emotional stability) have been the subject of more than 50 000 studies. Conceptually, these traits share strong similarities. Self-esteem is the approval of oneself and the degree to which one sees oneself as ‘capable, significant, successful, and worthy’ (Coopersmith, 1967, pp. 4–5). There is an obvious link between self-esteem and generalized self-efficacy, the least studied of the four traits. Generalized self-efficacy is one’s estimate of one’s capabilities of performing, at a global level across many contexts. Clearly, the distinction between seeing oneself as capable, successful, and worthy (self-esteem) and generalized self-efficacy is subtle. Generalized self-efficacy and locus of control also share strong similarities. Locus of control is one’s belief in one’s ability to control one’s environment. It follows logically that individuals who judge themselves as capable of performing across many contexts (generalized self-efficacy) should see themselves as having control of their environment. Finally, self-esteem and neuroticism are also closely linked. Rosenberg (1965), the S6 J. E. Bono and T. A. Judge Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Eur. J. Pers. 17: S5–S18 (2003) researcher most often associated with the self-esteem concept, argued that neurosis was one sign of low self-esteem. In contrast, Eysenck (1990b) viewed self-esteem as indicative of low neuroticism. Irrespective of the causality between self-esteem and neuroticism, the traits clearly are related. Treatment of the traits in the literature Given these strong conceptual similarities, it is surprising that the four traits are nearly always studied in isolation. Self-esteem and locus of control are the traits most likely to be considered together. However, when the two traits are included together in a study, they are most commonly entirely separate variables. For example, while Ghorpade, Hattrup, and Lackritz (1999) focused on cross-cultural differences in self-esteem and locus of control, they neither reported the relationship between the two traits, nor discussed their conceptual and empirical similarity. Finn and Rock (1997) related self-esteem and locus of control to student resiliency, and in doing so noted that the traits were ‘strongly related’ (corrected r1⁄4 0.73). Yet, the authors then proceeded to treat the two traits as entirely independent concepts with no further discussion of relationships between them. Another puzzling issue in research on the four core traits is their treatment as dependent variables in some studies, independent variables in others, and mutually causative variables in still others. For example, Wambach and Panackal (1979) investigated the main effect of neuroticism on locus of control, whereas Morelli, Krotinger, and Moore (1979) investigated locus of a control as a cause of neuroticism. Yet, articles continue to accumulate on these four traits—at an average pace of more than 1600 per year—with little or no discussion of how they relate to one another. Correlations among the traits Although the core traits are almost universally treated as separate and distinct, Judge, Erez, Bono, and Thoresen (2002) completed a meta-analysis of the relationship between the traits, using studies from the ten psychology journals most likely to include trait pairs. Their analysis of 127 articles revealed the following estimated, population level correlations between the traits. * Self-esteem–locus of control, 1⁄4 0.52. * Self-esteem–emotional stability, 1⁄4 0.64. * Self-esteem–generalized self-efficacy, 1⁄4 0.85. * Locus of control–emotional stability, 1⁄4 0.40. * Locus of control–generalized self-efficacy, 1⁄4 0.56. * Emotional stability–generalized self-efficacy, 1⁄4 0.62. The average (absolute) correlation among the traits is 0.60. As can be seen in the list above, the relationships involving locus of control are the weakest. Indeed, without locus of control, the average intercorrelation is 0.70, providing evidence of substantial overlap in the personality space assessed by measures of the four traits.