Core Self-Evaluations

Core self-evaluations (CSE) represent a stable personality trait which encompasses an individual's subconscious, fundamental evaluations about themselves, their own abilities and their own control. People who have high core self-evaluations will think positively of themselves and be confident in their own abilities. Conversely, people with low core self-evaluations will have a negative appraisal of themselves and will lack confidence. The concept of core self-evaluations was first examined by Judge, Locke, and Durham (1997) and involves four personality dimensions: locus of control, neuroticism, generalized self-efficacy, and self-esteem. The trait developed as a dispositional predictor of job satisfaction, but has expanded to predict a variety of other outcomes. Core self-evaluations are particularly important because they represent a personality trait that will remain consistent over time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_self-evaluations

Definitions of the four dimensions

Locus of control

The locus of control construct indicates a tendency for individuals to attribute life's events to their own doing or to outside forces beyond their control

Neuroticism

Neuroticism is an enduring tendency to experience unpleasant emotions (e.g., anger, anxiety, depression) easily. Those high in neuroticism react more negatively to stress, are prone to anxiety, and are susceptible to feelings of helplessness. Neuroticism, when examined as part of core self-evaluations, is conceptualized as the opposite of emotional stability

Generalized self-efficacy

"Generalized self-efficacy", adapted from Albert Bandura's original definition of self-efficacy, is defined as an individual's estimate of his or her own ability to perform well and handle a variety of situations. Although an individual can differ in levels of self-efficacy across different domains, generalized self-efficacy is the global estimate of ability across a wide range of situations, and can be considered a stable trait.

Individuals high in generalized self-efficacy are more likely to take on new tasks that allow for growth in their ability and are more persistent than those low in generalized self-efficacy.

Self-esteem

Self-esteem reflects a person's overall appraisal of his or her own worth. Self-esteem may, in fact, be one of the most essential core self-evaluation domains because it is the overall value one places on oneself as a person

Development of the construct

The core self-evaluation trait was developed through the study of job satisfaction.

Relationship between the traits

Many researchers of personality psychology argue that specific traits have been proposed and studied without considering that these traits have a broad, common core. Many such traits correlate so highly that they should be considered measures of the same construct, which is the case with the four traits of core self-evaluations. These traits are very closely related, and each one only predicts a small portion of job satisfaction by itself. However, when combined into one core trait (i.e., core-self evaluations), their predictive power increases.

Comparisons with the Five-Factor Model and positive/negative affectivity

Five-Factor Model ("Big Five personality traits")

There is skepticism that core self-evaluations contribute any predictive value above what the Big Five personality traits

Although it is true that some definitions of neuroticism include all four CSE traits, the Big Five does not refer explicitly to self-esteem in the description of neuroticism, nor is self-esteem one of the facets of neuroticism in their model. Therefore, the conceptualization of neuroticism in the Big Five is narrower than in core self-evaluations. Additionally, no existing neuroticism scales measure self-esteem. Furthermore, measures of neuroticism include only descriptive questions and lack an evaluative component.

Positive/negative affectivity (PA/NA) (Dispositional affect)

Although affective disposition does influence job satisfaction, a measure of positive or negative affectivity does not explain unique variance in job satisfaction beyond that explained by the individual core self-evaluations of self-esteem and neuroticism

Measurement

Previously, attempts to measure the CSE trait were indirect, requiring the trait to be extracted from the four scales that measured each trait. However, a direct core self-evaluation scale, the CSES, has recently been developed and proven both reliable and valid.

Length: Direct scales are able to measure the underlying trait in fewer items.

The core self-evaluations scale (CSES): The CSES consists of 12 items, and uses a five-point Likert scale (i.e., strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree) to score responses

Outcomes

Job satisfaction

Role of perceived job characteristics

attributes of the job that people traditionally find important, including the extent to which they identify with the tasks they are doing (identity), the extent to which they are assigned diverse tasks (variety), extent to which they feel their work affects others (significance). (cf Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose)

These characteristics play an important role in influencing the relationship between an individual's core self-evaluations and their satisfaction with their job.

Role of job complexity

a high CSE individual with a complex job will be more likely to be satisfied with their job. Similar to job characteristics, there is more than one explanation for this relationship. It could be that people high in core self-evaluation are attracted to more complex jobs because they see an opportunity for greater intrinsic rewards

Role of goal congruence

The theory behind goal congruence argues that people who choose self-concordant (i.e., congruent) goals will be happier with the goals they pursue, be more likely to put in effort towards achieving these goals, and, consequently, will be more likely to attain their goals

On the other hand, goals that are non-self-concordant will focus on more external factors. A person who chooses a non-self-concordant goal will focus on avoiding negative emotions (e.g., anxiety or guilt), satisfying someone else's wishes, or on external rewards, like money

On the other hand, individuals with negative self-regard will be susceptible to external factors like anxiety and guilt. These people will be more likely to pursue non-self-concordant goals and will report lower job satisfaction.

Job performance

the most popular of these theories argues that people with high core self-evaluations will be more motivated to perform well because they are confident they have the ability to do so.

Role of motivation

Despite the variety of theories, motivation is generally the most accepted mediator of the core self-evaluations and job performance relationship.

Previous literature suggests that those with negative self-appraisals (low CSE) will see a difficult task and determine that it is beyond their capabilities or out of their control, thus unmanageable. This will lead to low motivation and, consequently, poor performance.

Life satisfaction

A majority of the literature that examines core self-evaluations and job satisfaction also examines how both of these constructs relate to a person's overall life satisfaction. Consistently, it has been found that people with high core self-evaluations are more likely to be satisfied with their jobs and with their lives in general than those who have low core self-evaluations.

Job stress

Job burnout

Economic success

Judge and Hurst (2007) conducted a longitudinal study that assessed core self-evaluations in relation to income level in individuals as young adults and later as they entered mid-life. The authors found that core self-evaluations have a positive relationship with income level

an individual high in core self-evaluations will be more likely to capitalize on the advantages given to them via their family's economic success or through their own academic achievements and will consequently be more likely to be financially successful later on in life.

New directions/developments

The CSE trait was found to positively influence older adults' participation in progressive resistance training, which is a type of strength training.

Women raised with an authoritarian parenting style developed negative core self-evaluations, which caused them greater difficulty in making a career decision later in life. High CSE relates positively to vocational identity (i.e., commitment and exploration into one's identity as a worker), which is positively related to life satisfaction.

High CSE is associated with lower levels of emotional exhaustion and cynicism, both of which are related to job satisfaction

Those with high CSE tend to perceive and seek out greater levels of support, allowing them to effectively manage multiple life roles (e.g., their role at home, their role at work, etc.).

Practical implications

Due to the consistent relationships between core self-evaluations and these outcomes found in the literature, it is important to examine the implications these findings have on the use of core self-evaluation measures in an applied business setting.

Personnel selection

Below are the advantages and disadvantages of using core self-evaluations in selection

Advantages

the measure will remain a valid predictor of job satisfaction and performance.

Research reveals no adverse impact of core self-evaluations on minorities or older employees

Disadvantages

Core self-evaluations demonstrate a slight to moderate adverse impact on women

The majority of research suggests that applicants do not believe personality measures are relevant for selection. Thus, applicants may not perceive a fair selection system if a personality measure is included.

social desirability, where participants attempt to "fake" or respond with answers which will be viewed favorably by others as opposed to answering honestly

Drawbacks of hyper-CSE

Although CSE is generally thought to be a positive trait, hyper-CSE (i.e., very high levels of core self-evaluations) can lead to negative outcomes. Hiller and Hambrick (2005) suggest that hyper-CSE, common in executives, can lead to tainted decision-making (e.g., less comprehensive and more centralized strategic decision-making process, greater organizational persistence in pursuing strategies launched by the executive). Additionally, because those with high core self-evaluations are likely to have more confidence in themselves and believe that they control their own environment, hyper-CSE may also result in overconfidence effect and/or illusion of control.

Criticisms

two major criticisms of the trait have developed.

Theoretical support

The theory behind the core self-evaluations construct is abstract

For this reason, it is difficult to empirically test the CSE trait and its subconscious effect on locus of control, neuroticism, self-esteem, and generalized self-efficacy. Moreover, it is unclear why the CSE theory chose the four dimensions that it encompasses.

Conceptualization of the trait

Previous studies have theorized that CSE is an underlying (i.e., latent) trait that explains the relationship between locus of control, neuroticism, self-efficacy, and self-esteem. However, it has also been suggested that core self-evaluations can be conceptualized as an "aggregate construct," which is composed of or predicted by its four dimensions. In other words, an individual's levels on each of these traits may predict their level of core self-evaluations as opposed to the other way around. This conceptualization difference has important implications for how CSE is measured and, thus, has important implications for the effects