Attitudes and Job Satisfaction in Organizational Behavior

In organizational behavior, an attitude is used to explain how employees feel, think, and act toward work-related objects (e.g., a specific job, supervisor, or the organization). Two work outcomes are especially important for understanding attitudes: job satisfaction and related job attitudes that also guide behavior.

A core idea in research is that attitudes have multiple components—most commonly cognition, affect, and behavioral intention. These components work together to shape employee evaluations and, ultimately, job satisfaction and work behavior.2

The course section below (1) defines attitudes, (2) explains major types of attitudes used in organizational research, and (3) connects these attitudes to job satisfaction.

1) Defining attitudes: what “attitude” means in work settings

An attitude is a psychological tendency expressed by evaluating an object with some degree of favor or disfavor. In workplace research, attitudes are not random: they help predict how people evaluate their job experiences and behave in response.

Most organizational psychology frameworks describe attitudes with three components:

• cognitive component
• affective component
• behavioral component

This component view is consistent with the common “ABC model” of attitudes (Affect–Behavior–Cognition), which is widely used to explain how attitudes form and how they influence action.2

Why this matters for job satisfaction: job satisfaction is not only “what you think” about work; it is also “how you feel” after evaluating work experiences. One influential framing is that job satisfaction reflects both affective reactions and cognitive evaluations of the job.2

2) Job satisfaction as a key job attitude

A standard definition in the job satisfaction literature states that job satisfaction is “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences.”

Because job satisfaction is an evaluative state, it can be influenced by:

• Affective experiences (e.g., positive/negative emotions triggered by work events)
• Cognitive appraisals (e.g., beliefs about fairness, growth opportunities, workload appropriateness)
• Their interaction over time (job events can change emotions, which then shape later evaluations)

A prominent perspective in the job satisfaction area argues that affect and cognition are central ingredients in how employees evaluate their job—i.e., satisfaction involves the combination of job affect and cognitive evaluations.2

Key learning point: job satisfaction is best treated as an attitude-like evaluative outcome shaped by component processes, rather than as a single stable trait.

3) Types of attitudes relevant to job satisfaction

Researchers often distinguish among multiple “job attitudes,” usually by what the attitude is directed at (the target). For example:

• Job satisfaction is directed toward the job
• Organizational commitment is directed toward the organization
• Job involvement is directed toward work/job participation

This “target” distinction is important because job attitudes can correlate strongly but are conceptually different, and predicting behavior tends to work best when attitude and behavior are at the same level of generality and directed at the same target.

Below are the most commonly discussed attitude types in relation to job satisfaction.

3.1 Job satisfaction (attitude toward the job)

What it is: A pleasurable/positive emotional state resulting from appraising job experiences.

Typical components:

• affect (e.g., pride, frustration)
• cognition
• Behavioral outcomes (e.g., persistence, withdrawal)

How it connects to behavior: job satisfaction tends to predict employee responses such as performance, absenteeism, and turnover intentions, partly because it reflects both emotional and evaluative processes.

3.2 Organizational commitment (attitude toward the organization)

What it is: organizational commitment is a different target: it is an emotional/psychological bond to the organization rather than the job itself.

Many researchers conceptualize commitment as having subtypes (commonly summarized as affective/continuance/normative), and commitment is often strongly related to job satisfaction, even if they are conceptually distinct.2

Why it matters for job satisfaction: factors that improve job satisfaction (e.g., meaningful work, supportive supervision) often also increase commitment because employees integrate favorable job experiences into broader identification with the employer.

3.3 Job involvement (attitude toward one’s work role/job)

What it is: job involvement emphasizes psychological identification with one’s job/work.

Relationship to job satisfaction: job involvement is strongly connected to satisfaction because when employees value their work role highly and experience it as meaningful, satisfaction tends to increase.

3.4 Motivator–hygiene perspective (a “type” of factors shaping satisfaction)

A widely used framework for explaining which workplace factors create job satisfaction is Herzberg’s two-factor model, often described as motivation-hygiene:

• **motivators
• **hygiene factors

Herzberg’s approach is useful for job satisfaction because it reframes managerial improvement:

• Removing poor “hygiene” reduces dissatisfaction
• Adding “motivators” increases satisfaction more directly

This model helps explain why some employees feel “not dissatisfied” yet are still not highly satisfied: context can meet minimum expectations without providing growth or recognition.