Abstract
BACKGROUND:
There is a continual need to decrease the employment gap between people with and without disabilities. Psychological Capital (PsyCap) and happiness have shown strong relationships with employment and offer a promising avenue to desirable vocational rehabilitation (VR) outcomes.
OBJECTIVE:
Data from 137 former VR clients who were employed at the time of the study were analyzed to explore the relationship of PsyCap and happiness to levels of job satisfaction.
METHODS:
A mediation analysis was used in order to assess the hypotheses that PsyCap would predict job satisfaction and that happiness would mediate this relationship.
RESULTS:
PsyCap and happiness were found to uniquely and significantly contribute to job satisfaction, with happiness acting as a partial mediator between PsyCap and job satisfaction. These results highlight the potential utility of PsyCap and happiness in VR services.
CONCLUSIONS:
With the existence of both happiness and PsyCap interventions, we provide a brief summary of this research and implications for their use in VR research and practice. Additional exploration of these constructs is needed to test their potential for facilitating more stable employment outcomes for clients receiving VR services.
Introduction
State-federal vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies offer a multitude of services, trainings, educational opportunities, counseling, and other restorative services all in an effort to facilitate employment of people with disabilities (Saunders, 2005). Research using Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) 911 data has repeatedly shown a positive relationship between specific VR services and employment (e.g., Chan, Cheing, Chan, Rosenthal, & Chronister, 2006; Dutta, Gervey, Chan, Chou & Ditchman, 2008; Fleming, Phillips, & Kline, 2015; Tansey et al., 2015). This research, although critical for guiding decisions on what existing services are most effective for which individuals, does less to inform new interventions or innovations in the counseling process. Greater research attention is needed to address specific counseling practices in VR, particularly emerging or promising practices that may support employment goals of individual consumers (Fleming, Del Valle, Kim, & Leahy, 2013; Moore, Feist-Price, & Alston, 2002; Leahy et al., 2014; Sevak, O’Neill, Martin, Vandergoot & Grossman, 2013). Additionally, the larger aim of economic self-sufficiency, although not typically measured beyond 90 days of employment, is the hoped result for most every job placement in VR. Thus, it is important to understand and capture the factors that predict long-term employment stability beyond what can be analyzed from existing administrative data such as the RSA 911 data set (Ditchman, Miller, & Easton, 2017).
Job satisfaction, a commonly studied employment variable, is strongly correlated with several desired employment outcomes. Multiple meta-analyses have shown job satisfaction to be significantly related with greater job performance (Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton, 2001; Wright & Cropanzano, 2000), lower turnover (Fried, Shirom, Gilboa, & Cooper, 2008; Griffeth, Hom, & Gaertner, 2000; Wright & Bonett, 2007), and various health benefits (Faragher, Cass, & Cooper, 2005). Job satisfaction has also been linked with a number of other employment outcomes, including increased organizational commitment (Fu & Deshpande, 2014) and job burnout (Peng et al., 2016). In summary, job satisfaction is key to long-term vocational success. Despite the primacy of employment outcomes in state-federal VR, insufficient attention has been given to the factors that predict the job satisfaction of successfully closed VR clients. This gap may be due in part to the frontloaded nature of VR services in the employment process, which has traditionally given much more emphasis to job preparation and placement than post-placement outcomes. This focus on serves that lead to employment may serve to minimize attention to critical long-term factors like job satisfaction. Another potential reason for the sparsity of research on this topic may be the inherent difficulty in finding and recruiting these former clients for research, particularly once they have reached the 90-day case closure and are no longer an active VR client. Regardless, identifying factors that influence job satisfaction for former VR clients with disabilities may provide insights into how it is achieved, which can in turn be applied to predicting and possibly even increasing the probability of client satisfaction in future employment.
Several potential correlates of job satisfaction are proposed in the research, including environmental aspects such as pay, working conditions, and workplace supports (Dormann & Zapf, 2001; Judge, Piccolo, Podsakoff, Shaw, & Rich, 2010; Li, Roessler, Rumrill, & Ahmed, 2017; Roessler, Fitzgerald, & Rumrill, 2004; Wilkin, 2013; Zangaro & Soeken, 2007). VR counselors commonly attend to these environmental components throughout the job development, planning, and placement processes in effort to maximize fit or the congruence between the client and the workplace (Jagger & Neukrug, 1992). However, research suggests that these environmental factors are only weakly to moderately related with job satisfaction (e.g., Beveridge & Fabian, 2007; Jagger & Keukrug, 1992; Judge et al., 2010), suggesting that internal factors may play an important role in predicting job satisfaction. The recently increased focus on individual strengths and psychological capacities stemming from positive psychology offers promising alternatives to the exclusive consideration of external factors while also aligning with the philosophy of VR (Frain, Bishop, & Tschopp, 2009; Livneh & Martz, 2016; Martz & Livneh, 2016; McCarthy, 2014; McMahon & Kim, 2016).
Among the positive psychology constructs that have been considered in relation to job satisfaction, psychological capital (PsyCap) and happiness (i.e., subjective well-being) have received a great amount of support (Avey, Reichard, Luthans, & Mhatre, 2011; Diener, Nickerson, Lucas, & Sandvik, 2002; Lemelle & Scielzo, 2012; Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, 2007; Peng et al., 2016). PsyCap is a higher-order construct made up of the psychosocial strengths of hope, self-efficacy, resilience, and optimism. PsyCap was developed with the intent of providing a relatively malleable, state-like construct in comparison with more trait-like constructs such as personality or core self-evaluations (Luthans et al., 2007). Happiness, along with closely related constructs such as well-being and affectivity, is a core positive psychology construct that is defined by a frequent positive affect, life satisfaction, and infrequent negative affect (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, & Schkade, 2005). In positive psychology, PsyCap and happiness are viewed as a means to success as much or more than its product (Fredrickson, 2001). Indeed, both PsyCap and happiness have been found predictive of job satisfaction and performance (Avey, Reichard, Luthans, & Matre, 2011; Connelly & Viswesvaran, 2000; Cropanzano & Wright, 2001; Diener, Nickerson, Lucas, & Sandvik, 2002; Luthans, Zhu, & Avolio, 2006), and a combination of longitudinal and experimental studies support the hypothesis that both PsyCap and happiness precedes and precipitates employment success (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon et al., 2005).
With evidence for PsyCap and happiness influencing job satisfaction in the general population, it is important to consider the manner in which these variables combined to influence job satisfaction. Research suggests that PsyCap and happiness are independent but closely linked constructs (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2015). Theory and research further suggest that PsyCap may act to produce greater individual happiness (Culbertson, Fullagar, & Mills, 2010; Roche, Haar, & Luthans, 2014; Siu, 2013). PsyCap has been argued to influence happiness, in part, through the positive appraisals of past, present, and future that motivate people to engage life’s challenges (Luthans, Youssef, Sweetman, & Harms, 2013; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2015). A longitudinal study supported this assumption by showing PsyCap at Time 1 to predict the well-being of participants at Time 2 even after controlling for baseline well-being (Avey, Luthans, Smith, & Palmer, 2010).
Despite widespread use in the organizational psychology literature, to our knowledge, PsyCap and happiness have never been tested as predictors of employment outcomes with people with disabilities. The purpose of this study is gain a better understanding of whether and how the psychological strengths of PsyCap and happiness influence job satisfaction for a currently employed sample of former VR clients. Information gleaned from this study may shed additional light on the potential for PsyCap and well-being to influence and facilitate job satisfaction at initial employment and beyond. Based on the research, we will also test the potential mediating influence of happiness on PsyCap and job satisfaction. The results from this study may guide future intervention and innovation in VR practice aimed at supporting stable, long-term employment for individuals with disabilities. The following hypotheses were addressed in this study:
Hypothesis 1: PsyCap will predict job satisfaction for former VR clients.
Hypothesis 2: The relationship between PsyCap and job satisfaction of former VR clients is mediated by happiness.
Methods
Participants
Participants were recruited as part of a larger data collection effort through a state VR agency in the southeast region of the United States. Surveys were emailed to former clients from selected fiscal year cohorts (2013-2014, 2014-2015, and 2015-2016), and respondents were included in our sample if they reported current employment. This resulted in a final sample of 137 participants. The sample was 55% female, and approximately 70% Caucasian, with another 27% of respondents identifying as African American. The mean age of respondents was 37.54 years old (SD = 13.01). Approximately a third of participants reported having their disability since birth (33%), with another 44% reporting that they have had a disability for 10 or more years. Participants reported the following disability conditions (could select more than one): hearing impairment, 29%; learning disability or attention disorder, 20%; mental health condition, 19%; chronic health condition, 8%; mobility impairment, 9.5%; Blind or visually impaired, 9.5%; brain injury, 9.5%; intellectual or developmental disability, 5%, autism spectrum disorder, 5%. With respect to education level, 27% of respondents reported a high school diploma, with another 40% reporting some post-secondary education or an associate’s degree and 32% reporting a bachelor’s degree or higher. While participants were recruited from closed cases, 22% reported that they were again receiving services at this time. Almost 25% were receiving social security benefits, and 41% of the sample reported a household income of $29,999 or less.
Measures
PsyCap
PsyCap was measured using a combination of four established measures of each construct, namely, self-efficacy, hope, resilience, and optimism. The total scale consisted of 26-items. Self-efficacy was measured using the eight-item New General Self-efficacy Scale (NGSE; Chen, Gully, and Eden, 2001). Example questions are, “When facing difficult tasks, I am certain that I will accomplish them”, and “Even when things are tough, I can perform quite well”. Hope was measured using the six-item State Hope Scale developed by Snyder et al. (1996). Example questions are, “I can think of many ways to reach my current goals,” and “At the present time, I am energetically pursuing my goals”. Optimism was measured using the six-item Life Orientation Test-Revised developed and revised by Scheier and colleagues (Scheier & Carver, 1985; Scheier, Carver, & Bridges, 1994). Example questions are, “In uncertain times, I usually expect the best,” and “Overall, I expect more good things to happen to me than bad”). And finally, resilience was measured using the six-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS; Smith et al., 2008). Example questions are, “I tend to bounce back quickly after hard times”, “I usually get through difficult times with little trouble,” and “I have a hard time making it through stressful events.”
Happiness
Happiness was measured using The Subjective Happiness Scale developed by Lyubomirsky and Lepper (1999) as a global, subjective measure of happiness. It is a unidimensional scale comprising four items (e.g., “Some people are generally very happy. They enjoy life regardless of what is going on, getting the most out of everything. To what extent does this characterization describe you?”). Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7. The anchors for each question vary slightly, with 1 indicating the least amount of happiness and 7 the greatest for three of the four items. Continuing with the example above, the responses range from 1 (Not at all) to 7 (A great deal). A total score of happiness is obtained by computing the mean of the scores, with higher means reflecting a higher level of happiness. The reliability and validity were initially assessed using a broad range of 14 adult samples (N = 2,732). Internal consistency ranged from.79 to.94 (M = 0.86), and test-retest reliability coefficients ranged from.55 to.90 (M = 0.72) in repeat administrations ranging from 3 weeks to a year. Construct validity was also supported based on correlations in the expected direction between this scale and other similar and dissimilar constructs (e.g., self-esteem, optimism, positive emotionality and negative emotionality, extraversion and neuroticism, and dysphasia; Lyubomirksy & Lepper, 1999). Internal consistency was calculated at.81 in our sample.
Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction was measured using the 18-item Work-related Basic Need Satisfaction Scale developed by Van den Broek, Vansteenkiste, De Witte, Soenens, and Lens (2010). The three measured aspects of job satisfaction measured in this scale are autonomy, belonging, and competence in the workplace. Respondents are asked to rate how much they agree or disagree with each item along a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Totally Disagree) to 5 (Totally Agree). An example item for autonomy is, “In my job, I feel forced to do things I do not want to do;” for competence, “I am good at the things I do in my job;” and for belonging, “At work, I feel part of the group.” After reverse scoring selected items, a total score was calculated. A higher score reflects greater levels of job satisfaction. Internal consistency was calculated at 0.90 in our sample.
Statistical procedures
A mediation analysis was used in order to assess the hypotheses that PsyCap would predict job satisfaction and that happiness would mediate this relationship. This analysis was conducted using SPSS version 23, using macros that simultaneously estimate direct paths between variables and the indirect effects of a mediator (INDIRECT; Hayes, 2013). Bootstrapping was used to estimate the direct and indirect effects of PsyCap on job satisfaction, using the SPSS version of the Preacher and Hayes macro, downloaded from their website (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Estimates were based on 1,000 samples.
Results
A significant relationship was observed between PsyCap and job satisfaction in our sample (n = 137) such that higher levels of PsyCap were associated with higher levels of job satisfaction (path estimate = 0.56, p < 0.001). Statistically significant relationships were also observed between PsyCap and happiness (path estimate = 0.69, p < 0.001), as well as happiness and job satisfaction (path estimate = 0.29, p = 0.007). A single mediator model was tested (See Fig. 1) in order to examine whether happiness explained all or a portion of the relationship between PsyCap and job satisfaction. As predicted, happiness accounted for a significant portion of the relationship between PsyCap and job satisfaction (indirect effect = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.06–0.35). After accounting for the influence of happiness, the remaining direct effect of PsyCap was still significant (path estimate = 0.36, p < 0.001). The adjusted R2 value for this model was 0.29, df = 134, p < 0.001. Results of this single mediator model indicate that happiness serves as a partial mediator of the relationship between PsyCap and job satisfaction, with both PsyCap and happiness having a significant influence on the prediction of job satisfaction.

Mediation model of the relationships between Psycap, happiness, and job satisfaction.
PsyCap and happiness significantly and independently contributed to the prediction of job satisfaction among employed respondents in our sample, with happiness acting as a partial mediator between PsyCap and job satisfaction. Results support the consideration of VR clients’ strengths in their efforts to help clients achieve satisfying employment outcomes. These findings are in line with previous research in the general population (Achor, 2010; Lyubomirksy, King, & Diener, 2005). PsyCap and happiness offer promising applications for VR agencies due to their centrality in VR philosophy and practice and also due to the positive relationship of these strengths with primary VR outcomes. As the only known study evaluating PsyCap in a sample of former VR clients, this study provides further support for the construct and its applicability to persons with disabilities and to the VR setting.
The process of VR counseling offers limited opportunity to directly influence post-employment job satisfaction. Arguments have been made for increased intervention on happiness and well-being of VR clients (Chapin & Holbert, 2009; 2010). Although more testing is needed, results support and extend the argument by providing evidence that VR counselors may be able to indirectly influence job satisfaction in future employment through an emphasis on PsyCap and happiness. Such efforts might include the braiding of targeted interventions into business-as-usual VR services as well as through more formal training and interventions. The typical VR process offers many opportunities for the intentional identification, development, and affirmation of client PsyCap and happiness. For example, VR counselors might more intentionally seek out and recognize evidence of these constructs in the background information provided during an intake interview, carefully noting the potential for these individual factors to serve as resources in shaping future employment outcomes. Another examples might include VR counselors’ encouraging clients to focus on positive rather than negative self-talk during processes that leave clients feeling unsure or vulnerable such as reviewing assessments or employment planning.
Regarding formalized interventions, both PsyCap and happiness have proven amenable to change through the use of relatively brief formal intervention, the effects of which have been shown to last over time (Bolier et al., 2013). This evidence, although not targeted to people with disabilities receiving VR services, offers promising potential for the VR process. Among tested interventions, some consist of a single exercise that could easily be braided into typical VR services (e.g., writing and delivering a letter of gratitude or optimistically writing about a future self) while others are more time intensive. We briefly describe some of these interventions for both PsyCap and happiness and consider their potential for application in a VR setting.
Luthans and colleagues developed a brief PsyCap intervention (PCI) that has consistently shown to increase PsyCap in business professionals and students (Luthans, Avey, Avolio, Norman, & Combs; 2006; Luthans, Avey, Avolio, & Peterson, 2010; Luthans, Avey, & Patera, 2008; Luthans, Luthans, & Avey, 2014). Of note, Luthans et al. (2010) also found increases in PsyCap resulting from PCI to correlate with increases in both self and manager-rated performance. Replication studies have shown similar results (Dell Russo & Stoykova, 2015; Ertosun, Erdil, Deniz, & Alpkan, 2015). Given the promise conveyed in existing research, we proceed with a brief description of the PCI.
The PCI has been used as both an in-person and online intervention offered in one or two sessions totaling approximately two hours. The intervention is based on foundational work on the components of PsyCap, including hope (Snyder, 2000), resilience (Masten, 2001), self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997, 2001), and optimism (Carver, Scheier, Miller, & Fulford, 2009; Carver, Scheier, & Segerstrom, 2010). True to the higher-order nature of PsyCap where the whole is considered greater than the sum of its parts, the PCI reflects an attempt to integrate concepts from each of the constructs in the intervention. This integration is accomplished primarily through guided efforts to identify workplace goals and then to develop a plan for their achievement that includes consideration of potential barriers or challenges. Luthans et al. (2006) argued that success in a goal setting and planning process that acknowledges the likelihood of adversity will have a positive influence on PsyCap. Strategies taught in the PCI include the following: (a) goals and pathways planning, (b) implementing obstacle planning, (c) building confidence, (d) developing positive expectancy, (e) experiencing success and modeling others, (f) use of persuasion and emotional affirmation, (g) building assets and avoiding risks, and (h) choose active confidence over despair in the influence process (Luthans et al., 2010). These eight components are believed to work together to influence overall levels of PsyCap.
Happiness interventions have been more varied in comparison with those for PsyCap but no less promising for application in VR. Researchers and clinicians have demonstrated success in increasing happiness and the closely related construct of subjective well-being through a variety of interventions ranging from mindfulness, expression of gratitude, performing acts of kindness, and building and using character strengths in novel ways (Diener et al., 2017; D’raven & Pasha-Zaidi, 2014; Kerr, O’Donovan, & Pepping, 2015; Lyubomirsky, Dickerhoof, Boehm, & Sheldon, 2011; Lyubomirsky, Sheldon et al., 2005; O’Leary & Dockray, 2015; Proyer, Gander, Wellenzohn, & Ruch, 2015; Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005; Sheldon et al., 2010; Sheldon & Kasser, 1998; Tay & Kuykendall, 2013).
Regardless of which interventions are chosen, a number of individual and intervention characteristics seem to optimize their effect (Deiner et al., 2017; Lyubomirsky & Layous, 2013). For instance, individuals who believe happiness to be malleable and put more effort into interventions experience greater results (Deiner et al., 2017). Older individuals from Western cultures have also been shown to benefit more than the younger counterparts from Eastern cultures. Regarding interventions, duration and variety appear to influence effectiveness, with an increase in duration and variety correlating with greater effect (Deiner, 2017). Interventions that nudge participants into continued practice of a happiness promoting activity also experience greater effects (Deiner et al., 2017; Lyubomirsky et al., 2011). One exemplary study targeted adults experiencing chronic pain to participate in an intervention that took into account individual differences and person-intervention fit (Müller et al., 2016). In this study, participants were offered an adapted version of the Person-Activity Fit Diagnostic, which is a tool for matching positive activities with personal preference (Lyubomirsky & Sheldon, 2012). Participants were asked to rate their preference for 10 validated positive psychology activities. The four activities receiving the highest ratings were selected for each individual were the ones completed. Participants were then asked to complete at least one of the 15-minute exercises no less than once a week for a total of eight weeks. Weekly reminders were sent to participants by email. Results showed a positive improvement in the subjective well-being, as well as a reduction in pain and depressive symptoms, and these results were maintained for the 2.5 months post intervention in which participants were measured (Müller et al., 2016).
The notably brief and independent nature of both PsyCap and happiness interventions suggests potential for inclusion in multiple phases of the VR process. The findings from this study offer greater confidence that such efforts would be worthwhile. However, more research, such as a randomized-controlled trial or longitudinal research conducted in a VR setting with youth or adults with disabilities is needed for greater confidence in the potential utility of addressing these psychological strengths in VR (Avey, Luthans, & Mhatre, 2008).
Limitations
The cross-sectional design used for this study does not allow for a consideration of causation. Longitudinal assessment or a randomized-controlled trial would address this question more effectively. The fact that study participants were a relatively small number of former VR clients from a single state suggest the need for caution in generalizing results to former VR clients across the U.S. Additional study including both objective and subjective measures of these constructs is needed to confirm findings.
Conclusion
One of the primary goals of the VR process is to help people with disabilities develop in ways that will assist them in achieving employment, self-sufficiency, and quality of life. PsyCap was developed from a human resources perspective to “maximize the human potential” (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). The strength-based constructs used in this study is consistent with the philosophical tenets of VR and offers an additional mechanism for improving outcomes for individuals using VR services. This study supports a relationship between PsyCap and happiness with job satisfaction among former VR clients. Promising results from brief interventions suggest benefits of intentional inclusion in the provision of VR services as a means for improving job satisfaction and other key outcomes for VR clients. Future work addressing the directionality of this relationship will bring greater clarity to the benefits of addressing these strengths in service provision.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest, and procedures involving experiments on human subjects are done in accord with the ethical standards of the Committee on Human Experimentation of the institution in which the experiments were done or in accord with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975.
