WANG X. L.
tion and compensation satisfaction based on a research sample
of 104 hospital staff. He found that there would be some dif-
ferences using different survey methods, just the same as Drehe
et al. had found. The third to find this problem is Miceli et al.
(1991). Their study of the compensation system satisfaction
(structure and management) features a sample of 2000 manag-
ers, who were divided into several levels according to their
positions. The study found that the view on salary system fair-
ness influenced organizational justice. External comparisons
play an important role in determining satisfaction rather than
salary system. At the same time, the study further notes that a
high level executive force makes the salary system fairer.
A compensation satisfaction research review for the last 30
years finds two obvious phenomena. First, people almost al-
ways use the same satisfaction content and variables related to
work. For example, Ronan and Organ (1973) investigated how
work experience, age, education, gender, organizational capac-
ity, and the actual wage influence salary satisfaction. At the
same time, Rice et al. (1990) did the same research with almost
the same variables. But there are also differences between their
researches. For example, a study does not regard it as organiza-
tion ability, but in another study it is often regarded as a part of
the organization ability. And some of other same routine vari-
ables have been used for many years. Second, most of the stud-
ies only concentrate on the pay satisfaction, much to the negli-
gence of raise, benefits, compensation system structure, and
management satisfaction. But some researchers investigated
some or all the four factors.
The satisfaction theory is not only applied in the field of hu-
man resource management, and government departments, but
also in public administration, health, science and technology
education.
The Measurement of Compensation Satisfaction
At the beginning, most methods measuring satisfaction
adopted one-dimensional method—Minnesota satisfaction ques-
tionnaire (Minnesota Weiss et al., 1967) and job satisfaction
index (Smith et al., 1967), Later on the main satisfaction model
(Dyer & Theriault, 1976; Lawler, 1971) came to be is multidi-
mensional model.
Heneman (1985) believes that either the theory of compensa-
tion satisfaction or actual measurement of the compensation
satisfaction can help researchers understand the causes and
results of satisfaction. He and Schwab, developed and validated
a multidimensional method which was used to measure satis-
faction, namely pay satisfaction questionnaire (Pay Satisfaction
Questionnaire, PSQ). Because of the satisfactory results, they
turned to remuneration related subjects and methods to do con-
ducted more research (Heneman & Schwab, 1985). Some re-
searchers have verified the correctness and reliability of the
PSQ (Judge & Wellbourne, 1994; Mulvey et al., 1991). But
there is at least one non-western researcher that questioned the
validity of these four factors (Lam, 1998). The study by Lam in
Hong Kong illustrated that there are only two factors—salary
and welfare—connected to the compensation satisfaction. Ever
since, people went on with some more investigations. But most
of the research is on the PSQ dimension (Ash et al., 1990;
Chrraher, 1991; Buckley, 1996; Carraher et al., 2004; Carraher
& Scarpello, 1993; Mulvey et al., 1990; Orpen & Bonnici, 1987;
Lance & Scarpello, 1989; Scarpello et al., 1988). As regards the
differences between compensation satisfaction measurement
and compensation satisfaction theoretical results, almost eve-
ryone predicts on the pay level while neglecting the factors that
can influence satisfaction, such as salary, benefits and compen-
sation management system and structure. P. Feuille (1974)
found that after controlling distributive justice, the interpreta-
tion difference of distributive justice (18.8%) on pay satisfac-
tion is two times larger than procedural (8.7%). Dreher (1981)
shows that the relationship between distributive justice (0.78)
and salary satisfaction is greater than procedural justice (0.42).
Miceli et al. (2000) also come to the same conclusion. In his
research on university instructors’ satisfaction, Wu Xiaoyi 吴
小易 (2006) finds it obvious that justice in salary assessment
procedure plays an important part in satisfaction effect. There
have also been some empirical studies that have investigated
the moderating variables and intermediary variable mechanism.
Scarpello (1988) found that procedural justice was a condition-
ing variable through which fair distribution influences satisfac-
tion behavior. Lawler (1971) found that fair distribution influ-
enced organizational commitment through compensation, but
procedural justice on salary satisfaction had no direct effect on
it, and that procedural justice just influenced the organization
commitment through satisfaction with supervisor. Smith (1969)
points out that compensation level, compensation structure, and
pay grade have a great effect on salary satisfaction, and there is
positive relation between salary level and salary satisfaction.
Derher (1981) also shows that the real wage and salary satisfac-
tion among the correlation coefficient is 0.28, but the propor-
tion of wage growth and salary satisfaction among the correla-
tion coefficient is 0.07.
Initially the research of satisfaction or satisfaction measure-
ment in the Chinese mainland is was focused on service Indus-
try, such as the satisfaction change of bank service, the satisfac-
tion in retail area of domestic and foreign brands, the tourism
satisfaction in ecological tourism, rural tourism, ancient vil-
lages tourism, and so on. Later, their inquisition extended to the
satisfaction with government service such as administrative
services, public projects. In recent years, there are a lot of sat-
isfaction researches related to peasants, including studies of
peasant life, medical insurance, rural public goods, employment,
and so on. Informed by foreign research, the research method
used by the scholars gradually changes from quantitative re-
search to qualitative research. In conclusion, in terms of ap-
proach methodology, variables, and measurement dimensions
the present study acknowledges important inspiration from
those research projects.
The Conceptual Model and Research
Hypothesis
Modeling
The reason why peasants are not satisfied and why there are
lots of disputes is summarized below and shown in Table 1.
The first is compensation standard. Of all the 44 documents
related to land compensation issues, there are 36 (i.e. 81.8%)
based on compensation standard of land acquisition and re-
garding the low compensation standard as the main reason for
the dissatisfaction of the peasants. Zhu Mingfen 朱明芬 (2003);
Kong Xiangzhi 孔祥智, Wang Zhiqiang 王志强 (2004); Lu
Qian 陆迁, Ye Xiaowen 叶小雯 (2005), Zhong Shuiying 钟
水映 (2007), Qian Zhonghao 钱忠好, Ma Kai 马凯 (2007),
Zhao Wei 赵伟, Zhang Zhengfeng 张正峰 (2009), and Lin
Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 69