Do personality factors predict job satisfaction?

Two studies investigated the relationships between personality traits and aspects of job satisfaction. In Study 1, job applicants (n=250) completed the Eysenck Personality Profiler and the Work Values Questionnaire (WVQ), which requires respondents to rate various work-related facets according to the extent to which they contribute to their job satisfaction. These facets were combined into two composites (hygiene and motivator) based on previous research. The three personality superfactors accounted for a small percentage of the variance in importance ratings (about 5%). In Study 2, employees (n=82) completed a measure of the 'Big Five' personality traits and the Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (JSQ), which assesses both what respondents consider as important in their work environment as well as their satisfaction with their current job. Importance ratings were again combined into two composites while job satisfaction ratings were factor analyzed and three factors, differentiated along hygiene versus motivator lines, emerged. Personality traits again accounted for a small percentage of the total variance both in importance ratings and in levels of job satisfaction. It is concluded that personality does not have a strong or consistent influence either on what individuals perceive as important in their work environment or on their levels of job satisfaction. (C) 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

Nuclear weapons as obstacles to international security

This article argues that nuclear weapons serve no useful purpose in military calculations; moreover, their continued retention invites the dangers of further proliferation and of accidental use. They are thus defined here as obstacles to, rather than as facilitators of, international security. Seven reasons are presented to support this contention, including an assessment of the moral implications and the strategic limitations of nuclear weapons. Despite these limitations, and the recent commitments made by the nuclear weapon states to eliminate their arsenals, nuclear weapons remain central to the strategic doctrines of these states. Several reasons are put forward to explain why this retention continues, including the unchanging nature of strategic mindsets, the presence of vested interests, and now, in the case of the USA at least, a renewed reliance on nuclear weapons, regardless of how appropriate and effective such a strategy might be against emerging terrorist or `rogue state' threats.

The Utility of the Human Security Agenda for Policy-makers

The idea of “human security” is gaining attention among policy-makers and security analysts. Little scholarly attention has been given to the questions of why states accept (or reject) a human security agenda or how such an agenda is incorporated into policy practices. The article suggests that a human security approach is most likely to be applied when both humanitarian and national interests combine. Yet when states or organisations adopt a human security approach, they often misjudge the complex and long-term commitment required of such an approach. There is also the potential for such an agenda to be manipulated to justify questionable courses of action. These issues frame an analysis of six recent case studies.