Preferred Name
Joshua Orndorff
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ORCID
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8877-6505
Date of Graduation
5-15-2026
Semester of Graduation
Spring
Degree Name
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
Department
School of Strategic Leadership Studies
First Advisor
Adam J. Vanhove
Second Advisor
Benjamin S. Selznick
Third Advisor
David E. Eagle
Abstract
Work calling has been recognized as multidimensional, yet the internal and external subdimensions of calling remain underexplored. To differentiate these subdimensions, this study examined how internal and external calling related to dark-side outcomes, rather than traditional positive outcomes, among students in various master’s programs using a time-lagged design over the academic program. Internal and external measures of calling were created based on subject-matter experts’ coding of the existing calling measure, the Calling and Vocation Questionnaire (CVQ) (Dik et al., 2012). The impact of calling type on dark-side outcomes of perceived stress, anxiety, depression, loneliness, and spiritual struggle was analyzed. A convex curvilinear relationship was predicted based on autonomy (internal calling) and relatedness (external calling) need frustration from Basic Psychological Needs Theory for calling type and the specific dark-side outcomes. Hierarchical quadratic regressions were run on each outcome. In addition, the interaction of calling type was examined using polynomial regression and response surface analyses for the dark-side outcomes. Overall, internal and external calling types did not impact dark-side outcomes, positively or negatively, except for significant, positive predictions of external calling with perceived stress and depression scores when controlling for Time 1 dark-side outcome scores. Also, a convex curvilinear relationship was found with internal calling and loneliness. Robustness tests used alternative internal and external calling scales with varying item lengths and total CVQ scores to assess their relations on dark-side outcomes. Again, there was minimal influence of calling type or overall calling scores on the dark-side outcomes. When testing the interaction between calling types, each model was not significant. Calling scores declined each year, and levels of internal and external calling scores changed relative to one another over time. That is, students reported greater internal calling in the first semester of the program, but greater external calling at graduation. Substantive issues were uncovered that may have important implications for calling research, such as ceiling effects and more general range-restriction issues associated with highly called samples. These findings do not negate the potential relevance of internal and external calling subdimensions but rather underscore the need to develop content-valid instruments to test their effects.
Included in
Industrial and Organizational Psychology Commons, Leadership Studies Commons, Other Psychology Commons, Religious Education Commons
