DOI: 10.23668/psycharchives.15185
title: SPSS data for study 2: Fraas, W. (2024). Passion in the context of work: measurement and fostering.
title: Fraas, W. (2024). Passion in the context of work: measurement and fostering. Study 2: Passion Scale peer assessment.

description: Peer assessment of the German passion scale (as translated in study 1, based on the dualistic model of passion; Vallerand et al., 2003, 2019) was investigated in an online-study using a German sample of working students (N=300). Predominantly carried by the leisure and sports domain, results showed good convergence of self and peer ratings for a freely designated passionate activity via the MTMM approach (Campbell & Fiske, 1959). Limitations include the poor convergence and underrepresentation in the sample of self and peer ratings in the other activity domains (work, education, social) and the online-only nature of the study (lacking control of which peers actually participated in the study). Contributions include the additional validation effort of the German passion scale and recommendations for a in-vivo replication of the study. The SPSS data file provided here was used for the main analysis of the according publication with the R syntax also provided in this repository. Thus, you can replicate it by using the SPSS data file with the R syntax "as is". Alternatively, you can adapt the R syntax to import the .CSV file (marked "ready for analysis"). Additionally, the unprepared and unfiltered study data is provided as a CSV. file (self- and peer ratings are already merged). Of course, any data provided here is devoid of any demographic variables.
description: Data for: Fraas, W. (2025). Passion in the context of work: Measurement and fostering [Dissertation, FernUniversität in Hagen, Hagen]. https://doi.org/10.18445/20251031-131856-0
description: Work passion gained popularity and relevance in IO-research since it’s definition through the dualistic model of passion (DMP; Vallerand et al., 2003; Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019), positing harmonious (HWP) and obsessive work passion (OWP). While the translation or adaptation of any construct is expected to be necessary for its wider use, some key understandings are also lacking as to date of this writing. Specifically, precise answers regarding the malleability and required timeframes for work passion to change, particularly to how to foster HWP or transform OWP into HWP are lacking. These research gaps slow the advance of passion research as well as the application of work passion as a psychological construct into useful applications for employees and managers in practice. This dissertation set out to contribute to filling these gaps with four studies. Study 1 (N=433) translated the passion scale (Vallerand et al., 2003; Marsh et al., 2013) to German and used exploratory structural equation modelling to validate it using a cross-sectional design. Study 2 (N=300) provided evidence for the appropriateness of passion peer assessment using the multitrait-multimethod approach (Campbell & Fiske, 1959), also implementing a cross-sectional design. Study 3 (N=338) longitudinally investigated cross-lagged relationships of autonomy, competency and relatedness as work passion antecedents with HWP and OWP over time using multilevel analysis in a 4-wave design with weekly measurement spacing. And, finally, study 4 (N=67) attempted to foster HWP through work basic need satisfaction in a randomized individual online intervention, also using multilevel analysis lasting 8 weeks total. All four studies used the University's online survey platform for participant recruitment complemented by snowball sampling in study 1 and 2, as well as the attempt to explicitly recruit non-studying working adults in study 4. As a result, and to varying degree, all four study samples contain German working adults with at least 20 work hours weekly who were studying remotely alongside their employment. Key findings of study 1 and 2 include the appropriateness of the German passion scale in self- and peer assessment, contributing the translated scale which is easily adaptable to other activity domains aside from work. Results from study 3 include autoregressive effects of HWP and OWP contributing to their understanding regarding subjective well-being homeostasis (Cummins, 2010), as well as relationships of autonomy at work with HWP and no relationship of any of the three basic needs with OWP across one week spacing using multilevel modelling. Exploratory regression analysis across measurement occasions however revealed relationships of autonomy and relatedness at work with HWP, as well as autonomy at work with OWP and a negative relationship of relatedness at leisure with OWP over time. Results from study 4 showed no effect of the devised randomized individual online intervention on either basic need satisfaction at work, nor HWP or OWP. Contributions of study 4 include a promising starting point for future endeavors to foster HWP through basic need satisfaction at work as well as the lessons learned there. Implications for theory are the added evidence of mixed support for DMP theory, with all four studies providing more reliable support for proposed relationships regarding HWP, and mixed support for proposed relationships with OWP. Regarding implications for practice, some open questions remain, as other than the investigated timeframes may be promising and other fostering approaches may turn out to be more fruitful.