An examination of scaling bias in Herzberg's theory of job satisfaction

Abstract

Recent criticisms of the two-factor theory of job satisfaction suggest that Herzberg's reliance upon the recall of critical incidents ( Ewen, 1964) and dual system of categorization ( Schneider and Locke, 1971) may have introduced a scaling bias in his method of experimentation which severely restricts respondents' opportunities to register negative reactions to motivators (Ms) and positive reactions to hygienes (Hs). Industrial trainees in two vocational education projects ( N 1 = 72, N 2 = 102) responded to check lists which contained both negative and positive performance specimens ( Whitlock, 1963) related to two of Herzberg's Ms and three Hs. These data were used to test three of King's (1970) formulations of Herzberg's theory dealing with the relative frequency of good and bad experiences engendered by Ms and Hs (Theories I through III). A set of hypotheses dealing with levels of satisfaction and dissatisfaction derived from Ms and Hs were also tested. The results of both studies failed to support Herzberg's two-factor theory. Rather, the results appeared to substantiate the contention of Graen (1966) and others about the greater potential for satisfaction associated with intrinsic work factors.