Final answer:
The statement is false; while emotional stability is significant, there's insufficient evidence to conclusively say that emotional people are more satisfied or productive at work than conscientious ones. Job satisfaction is influenced more by control over work, participation in decisions, and work-content factors than by emotional traits alone.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that emotional people tend to be more satisfied with their jobs, more committed to their employer, and produce more work than conscientious individuals is false. While emotional stability can play a role in job satisfaction and performance, it is not accurate to broadly state that emotional people outperform conscientious ones across the board.
Research on job satisfaction indicates that factors like having control over one's work, participating in decision-making processes, and having freedom from surveillance play substantial roles in enhancing job satisfaction. Moreover, a strong sense of vulnerability to stress and perceived risks are associated with lower job satisfaction. Behavioral traits, such as neuroticism which involves experiencing negative emotions, tend to correlate with decreased satisfaction and happiness at work.
Additionally, studies suggested that the work-content factor, which encompasses job variety, difficulty level, and role clarity, is significantly more predictive of job satisfaction than emotional dispositions. It's also important to note that cognitive and emotional aspects of job satisfaction measurements may need to be separated for more reliable results, according to Weiss (2002).