Table 7.

Hierarchical linear regression analyses: explained variance in dependent variables (Olkin–Pratt adjusted) by GMA and the Big Five (Step 1; method: Enter; CFT 20-R and MRS-25 scales) and character strengths (Step 2; method: Enter; VIA-IS120 scales with partial correlation coefficients ≥0.25 in accordance with Table 4).

	Step 1: GMA and Big Five	Step 2: Character strengths
Dependent variable	R2	ΔR2	Total R2
WRPS
Overall job performance	0.341	0.310	0.651
Individual-level performance	0.345	0.237	0.582
Individual task proficiency	0.342	0.264	0.606
Individual task adaptivity	0.298	0.234	0.532
Individual task proactivity	0.205	0.144	0.349
Team-level performance	0.336	0.306	0.642
Team member proficiency	0.375	0.275	0.650
Team member adaptivity	0.258	0.322	0.580
Team member proactivity	0.179	0.200	0.379
Organization-level performance	0.226	0.384	0.610
Organization member proficiency	0.227	0.314	0.542
Organization member adaptivity	0.170	0.335	0.506
Organization member proactivity	0.144	0.316	0.460
WDS
Overall deviant behavior at work	0.356	0.127	0.483
Interpersonal deviance	0.104	0.044ns	0.148
Organizational deviance	0.370	0.107	0.477

N = 169. All data were corrected for effects of sex and age before being entered into the regression analyses. GMA = general mental ability; CFT 20-R = Revised Culture Fair Intelligence Test Scale 2 (Weiß, 2006); MRS-25 = Minimal Redundancy Scales (Ostendorf, 1990); ΔR² = incrementally explained variance; p = significance level; WRPS = Work Role Performance Scale (Griffin et al., 2007); WDS = Workplace Deviance Scale (Bennett and Robinson, 2000). Only character strengths that showed a significant correlation (p < 0.0016) with the dimension of productive or counterproductive work behavior of interest were considered here.

^ns= ΔR² was not statistically significant.