Correlation Analysis of Job Satisfaction and Wellbeing in Psychology

This assignment delves into correlation analysis, examining the relationships between various workplace factors and employee wellbeing. The analysis begins by identifying the strongest correlation between mean job satisfaction and mean wellbeing, utilizing Pearson correlation coefficients to quantify the strength and direction of these relationships. The study explores the significance of this correlation, supporting the alternative hypothesis that there is a significant link between job satisfaction and wellbeing. Regression analysis is then employed to assess the predictive power of several independent variables—gender, organizational identification, and experiences at work (both positive and negative)—on job satisfaction. The R value and the proportion of change, along with the significance level, are interpreted to evaluate the model's fit and the significance of the predictors. Finally, crosstabulations are used to explore the relationship between gender and organizational identification, and the frequency of different scores. The assignment concludes with a list of relevant references.

TASK 2
1. The two continuous variable which are most highly correlated are mean Job satisfaction
and the mean wellbeing. This is majorly pertaining to the fact that the correlation of the
this is 0.275 which is moderate. On the other side all the other variables are having either
low correlation or in negative.
Correlations
mean
Job
Satisfac
tion
mean
Wellbe
ing
Ho
me
ID
Into
whi
ch
age
gro
up
do
you
fall
?
Gen
der
Ethni
city
mean
organisati
onal
identificat
ion
Evalua
tion of
leaders
hip
How
often
during
work do
you
have
negative
experien
ces ?
Never-
Very
much
How
often
during
work do
you have
positive
experien
ces?
Never-
Very
much
mean Job
Satisfacti
on
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
1 .275** .03
1
.00
8 .037 .019 .177* -.215* -.152 .154
Sig. (2-
tailed) .001 .71
5
.92
8 .663 .821 .034 .012 .072 .069
N 143 141 143 141 142 143 143 136 140 140
mean
Wellbeing
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
.275** 1 -.06
6
.05
6 .084 .057 .177* -.182* -.184* .289**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .001 .43
5
.51
4 .322 .501 .035 .034 .030 .001
N 141 142 142 140 141 142 142 135 139 139
Home ID Pearso
n
Correla
tion
.031 -.066 1 .02
6
-.123 .044 .100 .016 .065 .063

Sig. (2-
tailed) .715 .435 .75
5 .143 .597 .232 .856 .441 .455
N 143 142 144 142 143 144 144 137 141 141
Into
which
age
group do
you fall?
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
.008 .056 .02
6 1 .026 -.254*
* -.041 -.054 -.038 .076
Sig. (2-
tailed) .928 .514 .75
5 .757 .002 .629 .533 .657 .371
N 141 140 142 142 141 142 142 135 139 139
Gender
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
.037 .084 -.12
3
.02
6 1 -.160 .028 -.128 .027 -.012
Sig. (2-
tailed) .663 .322 .14
3
.75
7 .056 .741 .137 .750 .890
N 142 141 143 141 143 143 143 137 140 140
Ethnicity
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
.019 .057 .04
4
-.25
4** -.160 1 .229** -.092 -.044 -.071
Sig. (2-
tailed) .821 .501 .59
7
.00
2 .056 .006 .285 .604 .406
N 143 142 144 142 143 144 144 137 141 141
mean
organisati
onal
identificati
on
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
.177* .177* .10
0
-.04
1 .028 .229** 1 -.385** -.065 .102
Sig. (2-
tailed) .034 .035 .23
2
.62
9 .741 .006 .000 .444 .230
N 143 142 144 142 143 144 144 137 141 141
Evaluatio
n of
leadershi
p
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
-.215* -.182* .01
6
-.05
4 -.128 -.092 -.385** 1 .263** -.258**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .012 .034 .85
6
.53
3 .137 .285 .000 .002 .002
N 136 135 137 135 137 137 137 137 136 136

How
often
during
work do
you have
negative
experienc
es ?
Never-
Very
much
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
-.152 -.184* .06
5
-.03
8 .027 -.044 -.065 .263** 1 -.200*
Sig. (2-
tailed) .072 .030 .44
1
.65
7 .750 .604 .444 .002 .018
N 140 139 141 139 140 141 141 136 141 141
How
often
during
work do
you have
positive
experienc
es?
Never-
Very
much
Pearso
n
Correla
tion
.154 .289** .06
3
.07
6 -.012 -.071 .102 -.258** -.200* 1
Sig. (2-
tailed) .069 .001 .45
5
.37
1 .890 .406 .230 .002 .018
N 140 139 141 139 140 141 141 136 141 141
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
2.
H0- there is no significant relation between the job satisfaction and the well being
H1- there is significant relation between the job satisfaction and wellbeing of the.
Correlations
mean Job
Satisfaction
mean Wellbeing
mean Job Satisfaction
Pearson Correlation 1 .275**
Sig. (2-tailed) .001
N 143 141
mean Wellbeing
Pearson Correlation .275** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .001
N 141 142

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
From the above table it can be seen that the significance level of the job satisfaction and the
mean wellbeing is 0.001 which is less than 0.05 then it means that the alternate hypothesis is
selected. This reflects that there is significant relation between the both the factors.
3.
Regression
[DataSet1] C:\Users\user\AppData\Local\Temp\Rar$DIa0.006\Dataset Task 2.sav
Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .278a .077 .042 .71742
a. Predictors: (Constant), How often during work do you have positive
experiences? Never-Very much, Gender, mean organisational identification,
How often during work do you have negative experiences ? Never-Very
much, Evaluation of leadership
ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression 5.570 5 1.114 2.165 .062b
Residual 66.395 129 .515
Total 71.965 134

a. Dependent Variable: mean Job Satisfaction
b. Predictors: (Constant), How often during work do you have positive experiences? Never-Very much,
Gender, mean organisational identification, How often during work do you have negative experiences ?
Never-Very much, Evaluation of leadership
From the above table it is clear that the R is 0.278 which means that there is moderate relation.
On the other side the proportion of change because of the independent factor over the dependent
factor is 0.77. this means that if there is any change in the independent factor then there will be
only0.77 change in the dependent factor. Further the significance level is 0.62 which is great than
0.05. hence this reflects that null hypothesis is being accepted and there is not any significant
relation among the all the variables that gender, organisational identification, negative
experiences, positive experiences predicting evaluation of leadership
4.
mean organisational identification * Gender Crosstabulation
Count
Gender Total
Male Female
mean organisational
identification
low identification with
organisation 1 5 6
2.05 0 3 3
2.06 0 1 1
2.08 0 1 1
2.11 0 3 3
2.16 0 2 2
2.17 0 1 1
2.21 0 1 1
2.22 1 0 1
2.26 0 2 2
2.32 0 1 1
2.33 0 1 1
2.37 0 4 4
2.40 0 1 1

2.42 2 2 4
2.47 0 1 1
2.47 0 4 4
2.53 2 4 6
2.53 0 2 2
2.58 0 7 7
2.61 1 2 3
2.63 0 2 2
2.67 0 1 1
2.72 0 1 1
2.74 0 3 3
2.79 0 1 1
2.84 0 4 4
2.89 0 1 1
2.95 0 2 2
3.00 0 5 5
3.05 0 5 5
3.11 0 2 2
3.12 0 1 1
3.16 0 3 3
3.21 1 3 4
3.37 0 1 1
3.44 0 1 1
3.47 0 1 1
3.53 0 2 2
3.98 0 1 1
4.00 2 2 4
4.09 0 2 2
4.23 0 2 2
4.32 0 2 2
4.45 0 2 2
4.53 1 1 2
4.56 0 2 2
4.67 0 3 3
4.72 0 1 1
4.76 0 1 1

4.78 0 1 1
4.89 1 1 2
4.97 0 1 1
4.98 0 4 4
high identification with
organisation 1 17 18
Total 13 130 143
 Total males- 13
 Score of 4 on organizational identification scale- 4 (2 males and 2 female)
 Score a 2 on negative experience scale- no exact 2
mean organisational identification * Gender Crosstabulation
Count
Gender Total
Male Female
mean organisational
identification
low identification with
organisation 1 5 6
2.05 0 3 3
2.06 0 1 1
2.08 0 1 1
2.11 0 3 3
2.16 0 2 2
2.17 0 1 1
2.21 0 1 1
2.22 1 0 1
2.26 0 2 2
2.32 0 1 1
2.33 0 1 1
2.37 0 4 4
2.40 0 1 1
2.42 2 2 4
2.47 0 1 1
2.47 0 4 4

2.53 2 4 6
2.53 0 2 2
2.58 0 7 7
2.61 1 2 3
2.63 0 2 2
2.67 0 1 1
2.72 0 1 1
2.74 0 3 3
2.79 0 1 1
2.84 0 4 4
2.89 0 1 1
2.95 0 2 2
3.00 0 5 5
3.05 0 5 5
3.11 0 2 2
3.12 0 1 1
3.16 0 3 3
3.21 1 3 4
3.37 0 1 1
3.44 0 1 1
3.47 0 1 1
3.53 0 2 2
3.98 0 1 1
4.00 2 2 4
4.09 0 2 2
4.23 0 2 2
4.32 0 2 2
4.45 0 2 2
4.53 1 1 2
4.56 0 2 2
4.67 0 3 3
4.72 0 1 1
4.76 0 1 1
4.78 0 1 1
4.89 1 1 2
4.97 0 1 1

4.98 0 4 4
high identification with
organisation 1 17 18
Total 13 130 143
Score 1 on positive experience scale- not person having 1
How often during work do you have positive experiences? Never-Very
much * Gender Crosstabulation
Count
Gender Total
Male Female
How often during work do
you have positive
experiences? Never-Very
much
2 0 1 1
3 0 2 2
4 1 7 8
5 2 15 17
6 3 39 42
7 7 63 70
Total 13 127 140

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Akoglu, H. (2018). User's guide to correlation coefficients. Turkish journal of emergency
medicine, 18(3), 91-93.
Bakdash, J. Z., & Marusich, L. R. (2017). Repeated measures correlation. Frontiers in
psychology, 8, 456.
Schober, P., Boer, C., & Schwarte, L. A. (2018). Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and
interpretation. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 126(5), 1763-1768.