CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,994Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorEmployee Performance and ManagementErgonomics and Human Factors

The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work.

Morgeson, Frederick P., Humphrey, Stephen E.·2006·Journal of Applied Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Although there are thousands of studies investigating work and job design, existing measures are incomplete. In an effort to address this gap, the authors reviewed the work design literature, identified and integrated previously described work characteristics, and developed a measure to tap those work characteristics. The resultant Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ) was validated with 540 incumbents holding 243 distinct jobs and demonstrated excellent reliability and convergent and discriminant validity. In addition, the authors found that, although both task and knowledge work characteristics predicted satisfaction, only knowledge characteristics were related to training and compensation requirements. Finally, the results showed that social support incrementally predicted satisfaction beyond motivational work characteristics but was not related to increased training and compensation requirements. These results provide new insight into how to avoid the trade-offs commonly observed in work design research. Taken together, the WDQ appears to hold promise as a general measure of work characteristics that can be used by scholars and practitioners to conduct basic research on the nature of work or to design and redesign jobs in organizations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Certain task characteristics (e.g., autonomy and task variety) and knowledge characteristics (e.g., job complexity and problem solving) can motivate gig workers because gig workers may perceive gigs as being more meaningful and thus feel more empowered.

    “Based on job characteristics theory (Hackman & Oldham, 1975;Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006), they proposed that certain task characteristics (e.g., autonomy and task variety) and knowledge characteristics (e.g., job complexity and problem solving) can motivate gig workers because gig workers may perceive gigs as being more meaningful and thus feel more empowered.”

    From Gig work and gig workers: An integrative review and agenda for future research (2024) · cites this paper as Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006

  • Job autonomy is a multidimensional construct composed of scheduling autonomy, decision-making autonomy, and work methods autonomy.

    “Job autonomy can be understood as a multidimensional construct (Weber et al. 2020) which is composed of three dimensions: scheduling autonomy, including scheduling, planning, and prioritising of tasks; decision-making autonomy, using personal initiative or judgment to make decisions; and work methods autonomy, choosing procedures and methods for performing tasks”

    From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Morgeson and Humphrey 2006

  • Job autonomy is measured using the nine-item autonomy subscale of the 77-item Work Design Questionnaire, which has good internal consistency (α > 0.85).

    “Job autonomy is measured using the nine-item autonomy subscale of the more comprehensive 77-item Work Design Questionnaire [50]. The authors report good internal consistency for the autonomy subscale (α > 0.85).”

    From Increasing engagement with, and effectiveness of, an online CBT-based stress management intervention for employees through the use of an online facilitated bulletin board: study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial (2016) · cites this paper as [50]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Florida State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2006
Volume
91
Issue
6
Pages
1321-1339
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
DOI
10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321
OpenAlex
W2105386261
Cited by
2,994
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 244 · 2025: 243 · 2024: 207 · 2023: 293 · 2022: 284 · 2021: 246 · 2020: 212 · 2019: 197 · 2018: 167 · 2017: 150 · 2016: 117 · 2015: 135 · 2014: 135 · 2013: 99 · 2012: 77
FWCI
35.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Employee Performance and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Ergonomics and Human Factors
Keywords
job design, job characteristics, job satisfaction, task characteristics, knowledge work, social support, training needs, scale development, psychometric validation, job redesign
MeSH terms
Employment, Humans, Motivation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Workplace

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review