The Italian version of the Passion for Work Scale: First psychometric evaluations

Abstract

Passion is a strong inclination toward an activity that people like and find important, characterized by harmonious passion and obsessive passion. This study aims to provide a psychometric evaluation of the Italian version of the Passion Scale developed by Vallerand and colleagues, applied to work. To assess the factorial validity of the Italian scale, an exploratory factor analysis (N = 101) and a confirmatory factor analysis (N = 234), along with correlations to assess the validity, were performed. The exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure, in line with the original study, and one item from the harmonious passion dimension was deleted. The confirmatory factor analysis that was conducted confirmed the two-factor structure. Results suggest that the Italian version of the Passion Scale applied to work can be used in research, allowing to detect an important individual factor influencing well-being and the quality of working life.

Resumen

La pasión es la fuerte inclinación hacia una actividad que gusta a las personas y que consideran importante, teniendo dos vertientes, la pasión armoniosa y la pasión obsesiva. Este estudio se centra en la evaluación psicométrica de la versión italiana de la Escala de Pasión, desarrollada por Vallerand y colaboradores, aplicada al ámbito del trabajo. Con el fin de obtener la validez factorial de la escala italiana, se realizó un análisis factorial exploratorio (N = 101) y un análisis factorial confirmatorio (N = 234) y se calcularon las correlaciones para evaluar la validez. El análisis factorial exploratorio descubrió una estructura de dos factores, como en el estudio original, suprimiéndose un elemento de la dimensión pasión armoniosa. El análisis confirmatorio confirmó la estructura de dos factores. Los resultados indican que la versión italiana de la Escala de Pasión aplicada al trabajo puede utilizarse en investigación, permitiendo descubrir un importante factor individual que influye en el bienestar y en la calidad de vida laborales.

In the last fifteen years, psychology developed a new field of interest named Positive Psychology (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Contrary to “traditional” studies, that generally apply psychology to negative experiences and to what impedes a good quality of life, this perspective particularly focuses on individual well-being. Recognizing positive experiences and factors making life worth living, also through the improvement of social and cultural environments, in fact characterizes this new positive view. According to this theoretical framework, which is more and more interesting psychologists, the concept of passion is also increasingly assuming relevance, since it can contribute to answering what leads to a better life (Marsh et al., 2013). Vallerand et al. (2003) define passion as a strong inclination toward an activity which the individual likes (or loves), finds important, and spends energy and time in it. Therefore, the passionate activity is very significant in the individual's life and becomes an essential feature of an individual's identity (Carpentier, Mageau, & Vallerand, 2012; Mageau et al., 2009). In line with the Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), Vallerand et al. (2003) suggest that this centrality of activity in the individual's identity occurs because of the basic human inclination to a higher order organization taking place through the integration process between the individual and the context. According to Vallerand et al. (2003), in fact, the activity that the individual likes (or loves) engages him/her regularly so that such activity is internalized in the person's identity and highly valued. This process flows into passion toward the activity and is functional to define the individual. According to the Dualistic Model of Passion proposed by Vallerand et al. (2003), indeed, depending on the way and on the context in which the activity is internalized in the individual's identity, it is possible to live a Harmonious Passion (HP) or an Obsessive Passion (OP) for the activity. Vallerand et al. (2003) operationalized this dualistic model in a 14-item scale which provides 7 items for HP and 7 items for OP. More specifically, HP occurs when the individual acts an autonomous internalization of the activity in his/her identity. This autonomous internalization arises when the participation in the activity is felt as free, without pressure, and is performed because it is important for the individual. This type of internalization produces motivation and engagement in carrying out the activity, which is significant for the individual, but not pervasive in his/her identity. While experiencing HP, in fact, the activity results as in harmony with other elements of the individual's life. An example of HP item of the scale proposed by Vallerand et al. (2003) is “this activity is in harmony with the other activities in my life”. On the contrary, OP occurs when the internalization of the activity in the individual's identity is controlled. It is characterized by intrapersonal/interpersonal pressures and contingencies linked to the activity (such as emotional states referred to social acceptance or self-esteem, or to the uncontrollable enthusiasm to engage the activity) that drives obsessively the individual to participate in the activity. As it is a passionate activity, the individual likes the activity, but it is as if he/her is forced to do it because of the internal forces and connections controlling him/her. This lack of control makes the activity pervasive in the individual's identity and the activity can be in conflict with the other elements of the individual's life. An example of OP item of the scale proposed by Vallerand et al. (2003) is “the urge is so strong, I can’t help from doing this activity”.

Some studies applied the concept of passion also to work activity (Donahue et al., 2012; Lavigne, Forest, & Crevier-Braud, 2012; Marsh et al., 2013; Vallerand & Houlfort, 2003), and for the crucial role of the topic in the field of work and organizational psychology, other studies applied the Scale of Passion for general activity (Vallerand et al., 2003) to the work activity, such as the Spanish version of the scale (Orgambídez-Ramos, Borrego-Alés, & Gonçalves, 2014) or the Portuguese adaptation (Gonçalves, Orgambídez-Ramos, Ferrão, & Parreira, 2014). The translations of the scale to different languages, moreover, are a sign of the growing relevance of the topic. Work, indeed, is one of the most important and durable activities along the individual's life and requires time and energy. As highlighted by Vallerand and Houlfort (2003), work is a central aspect and contributes to defining individuals, and can become a part of the person's identity. Therefore, as other activities, the dualistic model of passion can be applied to the work experience and both dimensions are described as crucial for understanding the individual's engagement in his/her work (Lavigne et al., 2012). Moreover, in this view, passion for work can also be a key individual factor that can affect the perception of well-being or distress (Vallerand et al., 2003; Lavigne et al., 2012) and, therefore, the quality of working life.

Considering the importance of the topic for studies detecting factors related to well-being at work and to the perception of the quality of working life, the aim of this study was to provide a first psychometric evaluation of the Italian version of the Passion Scale developed by Vallerand et al. (2003) and applied to work activity. The study shows the factorial validity of the Italian Passion for Work Scale through two steps of analyses: an exploratory factor analysis performed on a sample of 101 workers, and a confirmatory factor analysis performed on a sample of 234 workers. The two dimensions composing the dualistic model of passion, HP and OP, are expected to be found, in line with the original study by Vallerand et al. (2003). Moreover, in order to assess the validity of the construct, the study performed also correlations between the two dimensions of passion and other constructs that literature indicates as related.

The Italian research lacks this measure, that seems to be crucial in understanding the dynamics of well-being at work. Having a reliable measure of passion for work activity can be a very important source, since it is an individual factor able to influence how individuals live a very important and predominant piece of their life: work.

Method

Participants

To assess the factorial validity of the scale, the two steps of analyses of this study considered two different samples of workers. Both groups of participants are random samples.

The first sample used to perform the exploratory factor analysis is a heterogeneous sample and is composed by 101 participants: 54.5% female, average age 42.29 years (SD = 12.86), 79.2% work full-time, average seniority 15 years (SD = 11.70). Moreover, 76% are employees, 13% workers (working class), and 11% managers.

Two hundred and thirty-four participants belonging to a professional association of project managers compose the second sample, used to perform the confirmatory factor analysis. In particular, 77.3% are male, average age 44.82 years (SD = 6.90), 90.5% work full-time, average seniority 11 years (SD = 6.55). Moreover, 65.3% of them are supervisors, 20.5% employees, and 14.2% directors.

Measures

Participants completed a self-report questionnaire composed by the following scales:

Passion. As mentioned, to measure passion, the Passion Scale by Vallerand et al. (2003) and adapted to work activity was used. The scale was assessed by 14 items (7 items for HP and 7 items for OP) on a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7, where 1 means not agree at all and 7 very strongly agree (HP: M = 4.25, SD = 1.39; OP: M = 2.03, SD = 1.01).

Job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was assessed with the scale by Pejtersen, Kristensen, Borg and Bjoner (2010) with a 4-item Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5, where 1 means strongly disagree and 5 strongly agree. The Cronbach's alpha for the present study is .82 (M = 3.43, SD = 0.72).

Life satisfaction. Life satisfaction was assessed with the scale by Pavot and Diener (1993) with a 4-item Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7, where 1 means strongly disagree and 7 strongly agree. The Cronbach's alpha for the present study is .91 (M = 4.42, SD = 1.29).

Positive emotions at work. Positive emotions at work were assessed with the scale by Warr (1990) and operationalized as psychological well-being. They were measured with a 6-item Likert scale ranging from 1 to 6, where 1 means never and 6 always. The Cronbach's alpha for the present study is .75 (M = 3.70, SD = 1.01).

Negative emotions at work. Negative emotions at work were assessed with the scale by Warr (1990) and operationalized as psychological discomfort. They were measured with a 6-item Likert scale ranging from 1 to 6, where 1 means never and 6 always. The Cronbach's alpha for the present study is .84 (M = 2.82, SD = 0.96).

Flow at work. Flow at work were assessed with the scale by Bakker (2008), using the Italian adaptation by Zito, Bakker, Colombo, and Cortese (2015), with a 13-item Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7, where 1 means never and 6 always. The Cronbach's alpha for the present study is .90 (M = 3.91, SD = 1.05).

Procedure

Before the administration of the Italian version of the passion for work scale, the original version was translated from English to Italian, and back translated from Italian to English in order to control and verify items conformity. Moreover, the scale has been adapted from “passion for a general activity” to “passion for work”. This process was made with the supervision of an expert with English as mother tongue, with a satisfactory correspondence between items. Data were collected through an online questionnaire, placed on a platform implemented by researchers, but with different procedures: the first sample was randomly contacted, whereas the second sample received an email from their professional association of project manager with a link to the questionnaire, also published on the intranet of the association website. The board of directors of the association authorized the study and, since there was no medical treatment or other procedures that could cause psychological or social discomfort to participants, additional ethical approval was not required.

Before starting the questionnaire, participants had information about the voluntary nature of the participation in the study, the anonymity of their data, and instructions to complete the questionnaire.

Data Analysis

To assess the factorial structure of the Italian version of the Passion for Work Scale, data analyses followed two main stages: the first concerned the heterogeneous sample (N = 101) for the exploratory factor analysis with SPSS 22. The second stage involved the sample of professional workers (N = 234) for the confirmatory factor analyses, conducted with Mplus 7. The model goodness of fit was tested considering the following indices: chi-square value (χ²), Comparative Fit Index (CFI, Bentler, 1990), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI; Tucker & Lewis, 1973), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA; Steiger, 1990), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR; Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993).

Moreover, in order to assess the validity of the scale and deepen the psychometric characteristics of the Italian version of Passion for Work scale, the correlations (Pearson's r) between the two dimensions of the Italian version of Passion for Work Scale and other construct that literature highlighted to be correlated with the dualistic model of passion were examined (in both the samples used for the exploratory and the confirmatory factor analyses; N = 335). In fact, in the light of the characteristics of the type of passion and of how the work activity is internalized (Marsh et al., 2013; Vallerand et al., 2003; Vallerand & Houlfort, 2003), it is expected that HP is more correlated with job and life satisfaction, flow at work experiences, and positive emotions at work, and less with negative emotions at work; on the contrary OP is expected to correlate with HP. Also, an analysis of variance (independent samples t-test) was conducted in order to deepen the characteristics of the passion construct, by comparing passion scores for women and men.

Finally, in order to assess the internal consistencies of measures, Cronbach's alphas were calculated both for the two factors of the Italian version of the Passion for Work scale, and for each measure considered in the study.

Correlations, analyses of variance and Cronbach's alphas were performed with SPSS 22.

Results

Exploratory Factor Analysis

The exploratory factor analysis has been conducted with the maximum likelihood (ML) extraction from the 14 items, through different solutions in order to explore data: eigenvalues > 1 with two factors extraction, and then the requirement of one, two, and three factors with no rotation, with Varimax, with Oblimin, and with Promax rotation for each number of factors extraction. In line with theoretical bases and previous empirical findings, the best result was the two-factor solution with Oblimin rotation (Kaiser's normalization) and, as expected and in line with the original scale by Vallerand et al. (2003), factors can be named Harmonious Passion and Obsessive Passion. Within this solution, eliminating item 7 from the dimension of HP was chosen (original item “I am completely taken with this activity”, Italian translation “sono completamente preso da questo lavoro”), since it overlapped with the two factors. Actually, in the Italian language, this item could suggest also the sense to be very occupied in the activity, in line with the concept of obsessive thought. The exploratory factor analysis with 13 items was hence conducted to verify the new factor solution, with good results. The chosen solution resulted therefore composed by 13 items (see Table 1): HP (six items, α = .92) and OP (seven items, α = .87). The factor loading for the 13-item solution ranges between |.68| and |.95| for HP, and between |.56| and |.79| for OP. Moreover, the Bartlett's Test of Sphericity is significant (p < .000), thus making the factor analysis possible, and the KMO is very satisfactory (.87).

Table 1.

Exploratory Factor Analysis - 13-item Solution (ML extraction; Oblimin rotation; Kaiser's normalization). N = 101.

Item Number	Items	Factors
		HP	OP
i2	Le cose nuove che scopro con questo lavoro mi permettono di apprezzarlo ancora di più. [The new things that I discover with this activity allow me to appreciate it even more]	.95	-.11
i3	Questo lavoro mi permette di vivere esperienze molto positive. [This activity allows me to live memorable experiences]	.89	-.01
i1	Questo lavoro mi permette di vivere diverse esperienze. [This activity allows me to live a variety of experiences]	.84	-.03
i4	Questo lavoro riflette le qualità che amo di me. [This activity reflects the qualities I like about myself]	.73	.17
i5	Questo lavoro è in equilibrio con le altre attività della mia vita. [This activity is in harmony with the other activities in my life]	.69	-.04
i6	Questo lavoro per me è una passione che so controllare. [For me it is a passion, that I still manage to control]	.68	.27
i11	Sono emotivamente dipendente da questo lavoro. [I am emotionally dependent on this activity]	.08	.79
i9	Il desiderio di svolgere questo lavoro è così forte che non riesco a farne a meno. [The urge is so strong, I can’t help doing this activity]	.23	.77
i10	Ho difficoltà a immaginare la mia vita senza questo lavoro. [I have difficulty imagining my life without this activity]	.16	.74
i13	Provo un sentimento quasi ossessivo verso questo lavoro. [I have almost an obsessive feeling for this activity]	-.05	.74
i8	Non posso vivere senza questo lavoro. [I cannot live without it]	.16	.71
i12	Controllo con difficoltà il mio bisogno di svolgere questo lavoro. [I have a tough time controlling my need to do this activity]	-.11	.65
i14	Il mio umore dipende dalla mia capacità di svolgere questo lavoro. [My mood depends on me being able to do this activity]	-.09	.56
Alpha		.92	.87
Mean (item)		4.19	2.20
Standard deviation		1.4	1.3
Correlation between factors
		HP	OP
HP		1
OP		.36	1

Note. HP = Harmonious Passion, OP = Obsessive Passion.

The factor solution absorbs 61.5% of the total variance (HP explains 44.1% of the variance and OP explains 17.4%) and this is in line with the original 14-item scale by Vallerand et al. (2003) that absorbed 54.7% of the total variance.

The correlation between the two factors HP and OP is r = .36.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

The confirmatory factor analysis was performed on the second sample (N = 234). As shown in Table 2, different models were tested with ML method: with one factor, with two factors with the original composition of factors, and with 13 items without item 7, on the basis of the exploratory factor analysis. Model 1 and 2 gave unsatisfactory fit indices and Model 3 showed fit indices not completely acceptable. Evaluating the modifications indices calculated by Mplus (default option Modification M.I. – 3.840), the fit improved by adding two correlations in the model estimation (Model 4). More specifically, correlations between items 5 and 6 and between items 8 and 9 were included. At a semantic level, the suggested correlations made sense: items 5 (“This activity is in harmony with the other activities in my life”) and 6 (“For me it is a passion, that I still manage to control”) in fact they seem to be particularly linked to the aspects of the harmonious balance of the working activity with the individual's life and of the non-pervasiveness of work in the lifetime. Moreover, at a semantic level, items 8 (“I cannot live without it”) and 9 (“The urge is so strong, I can’t help doing this activity”) seem to be linked to the exclusivity of the work and its pervasiveness, as if the work were related to the identity of the person characterizing his/her life. Therefore, Model 4 was calculated obtaining good fit indices. Moreover, this inclusion did not modify other estimated parameters, and the dualistic model of passion emerged from the analysis. It has to be noted that the RMSEA value can be improved, but other modifications were not added in the estimation of the model, in order to have a cleaner model. These are preliminary analyses, and according to MacCallum, Browne and Sugawara (1996), RMSEA values ranging between .08 and .10 are still acceptable.

Table 2.

Results of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis: Estimated Models (N = 234).

MODEL	χ^2	df	p	RMSEA	CFI	TLI	SRMR	AIC	BIC
Model 1: 14-item Model (one factor)	767.374	77	.000	.20	.59	.52	.17	15979.629	16123.477
Model 2: 14-item Model (two factors)	273.754	76	.000	.11	.88	.86	.08	15488.009	15635.282
Model 3: 13-item Model (without item 7)	275.436	64	.000	.12	.89	.86	.08	14722.362	14859.360
Model 4: 13-item Model (without item 7 and correlations between items 5 and 6, and between items 8 and 9)	179.466	62	.000	.09	.94	.92	.06	14651.726	14795.574

Deepening Model 4, all items load only on the intended factors and factors loading range between |.34| and |.93| for HP, and between |.46| and |.85| for OP (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Results of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (N = 234).

The correlation between factors is positive, in line with the original scale of passion by Vallerand et al. (2003).

Validity

Results of correlations between the two dimensions of the Italian version of the Passion for Work Scale (that the literature indicates as correlated with the two elements of passion), job satisfaction, life satisfaction, positive and negative emotions at work, and flow at work are shown in Table 3. HP shows high and positive correlations with flow at work (r = .71), job satisfaction (r = 54), positive emotions at work (r = .53), life satisfaction (r = .48), and OP (r = .30), whereas it shows a negative correlation with negative emotions at work (r = -.27). As for OP, it shows positive correlations with flow at work (r = .38), negative emotions at work (r = .20), job satisfaction (r = .16), and – though weak – with positive emotions at work (r = .13).

Table 3.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations (Pearson's r) (N = 335).

	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. Harmonious passion	4.25	1.39	(.92)
2. Obsessive passion	2.03	1.01	.30^**	(.87)
3. Job satisfaction	3.43	0.72	.54^**	.16^**	(.82)
4. Life satisfaction	4.42	1.29	.48^**	.10	.54^**	(.91)
5. Positive emotions at work	3.70	1.01	.53^**	.13	.59^**	.50^**	(.75)
6. Negative emotions at work	2.82	0.96	-.27^**	.20^**	-.35^**	-.36^**	-.50^**	(.84)
7. Flow at work	3.91	1.05	.71^**	.38^**	.50^**	.40^**	.56^**	-.27^**	(.90)

Note. Cronbach's alphas on the diagonal (between brackets).

**

p < .01.

The results of the t-test for independent samples was not significant: in this sample, there are not differences in the perception of passion, both HP, t(330) = -.901, p = .37, and OP, t(330) = .009, p = .99, for women (Mean HP = 24.71, SD = 8.21; Mean OP = 14.24, SD = 7.90) and men (Mean HP = 25.59, SD = 8.38; Mean OP = 14.24, SD = 6.72).

Discussion and Conclusions

The aim of this study was to assess, through psychometric evaluations, a preliminary version of the Passion Scale applied to work in the Italian language from the original scale by Vallerand et al. (2003).

The exploratory factor analysis was conducted with Oblimin rotation and showed the dualistic structure of the passion construct, reflecting the theory by Vallerand et al. (2003). In this step of analysis, item 7 was deleted, reducing the scale from 14 to 13 items. This is quite consistent with the study by Gonçalves et al. (2014) on the adaptation and validation of the Passion Scale in Portuguese: item 7 seems to overlap with the two dimensions of HP and OP (maybe because of the positive and negative ambiguity of the item – “I am completely taken with this activity” – since it overlaps with HP and OP both in Italian and Portuguese), suggesting a deletion of the item. In this sense, supporting this data, these authors highlight the fact that item 7 is the one with the lowest score loading, also in the original study by Vallerand et al. (2003). Therefore, on the basis of the results of this study and of previous studies, the 13-item solution was accepted and revealed two factors, HP (with 6 items) and OP (with 7 items), in line with the original scale.

The confirmatory factor analysis showed that the 13-item model, that followed the modification indices (Model 4), respected the original factor-structure suggested by Vallerand et al. (2003), and also the bifactor structure found by Orgambídez-Ramos et al. (2014), and fitted the data better than the other model (Model 1). Adding the correlations between items 5 and 6 and between items 8 and 9, in fact, did not alter any estimated parameter in the model and resulted reasonable from a semantic standpoint. Moreover, this procedure is in line with the study on the Passion Scale for an activity later developed by Marsh et al., 2013, which added this type of modification in both HP and OP dimensions.

It has to be noted that the confirmatory factor analysis shows some items (5, 6, and 13) loading under the .60 value. However, this is a first psychometric and preliminary evaluation of the measure, that can be a good guideline for future analyses, considering that fit indices of the 13-item model are acceptable.

The correlations between the two factors resulted positive both in the exploratory and in the confirmatory factor analysis. This positive relation is in line with the original study by Vallerand et al. (2003) and with other studies on the validation of the scale (Gonçalves et al., 2014; Orgambídez-Ramos et al., 2014). Despite this positive association between HP and OP, these studies underline, however, that the two types of passion are defined in their differences by the dissimilar association of the two types of passion with various outcomes. In fact, HP is indicated by authors as related with positive mood, flow, and engagement, whereas OP appeared to be related with experiences of conflict, work addiction in a compulsive view, and negative moods, but also with flow, engagement, and performance (Carpentier et al., 2012; Vallerand & Houlfort, 2003). Correlations in the entire sample (N = 335) performed in this study seem to confirm these empirical evidences: HP and OP are again positively associated, in line with the original study (Vallerand et al., 2003). Moreover, HP is highly correlated with flow at work, as suggested by Vallerand and Houlfort (2003) and in line with studies suggesting a positive association between passion and the positive experience of flow at work (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2003), also in protecting workers from discomfort (Lavigne et al., 2012). Moreover, in line with suggestions by Vallerand and Houlfort (2003), HP is positively associated with positive emotions at work, and negatively associated with negative emotions at work, respectively intended as indicators of psychological well-being and discomfort, highlighting the potential of HP for the individual well-being. In fact, HP results to be also highly and positively linked with both job satisfaction (in line with the study by Orgambídez-Ramos et al., 2014) and life satisfaction (in line with the study by Marsh et al., 2013). All these positive outcomes positively and strongly related with HP suggest the relevance of HP and the importance of reinforce the awareness about HP to better foster workers’ well-being in daily working activity.

As for the correlations of OP, it is interesting to note a positive association between OP and flow at work: these are not surprising results, since an individual who has developed an OP for work finds it important, is dedicated to it, and is absorbed. These are also characteristics of flow at work (Bakker, 2008) and are in line with the assumption that working with workload (or dedication) can lead to more absorption, which is a dimension making up the construct of flow at work (Bakker, 2008). This could explain also the positive correlations between OP and job satisfaction and, even if weak, with positive emotions at work. It is important to monitor the aspects of OP, since the individual feels he/she is working on something that he/she has internalized as important, likes or loves and could be satisfied with, but in the long term this activity could become in conflict with other activities of life, undermining health and well-being. In fact, OP is positively correlated with negative emotions at work: this is in line with Vallerand and Houlfort (2003), and considering that negative emotions are operationalized as an indicator of psychological discomfort, this result suggests also that OP can be damaging for the individual well-being.

In line with the study by Orgambídez-Ramos et al. (2014), the present study does not show any significant differences between women and men in the perception of HP or OP. It could be interesting to deepen this aspect, in particular referring to the relation between HP and OP and work-family conflict. This suggestion for future studies could be useful, first, because work-family conflict is depicted in the literature and by empirical evidences as a gender issue, and second, because of the link between OP and the possibility of experimenting conflict with the life domain.

Looking at the reliability of the two dimensions, they turned out to be satisfactory: the Cronbach's alpha coefficients are .92 for HP (.79 in the study by Vallerand et al., 2003; .92 in the study by Gonçalves et al., 2014; .92 in the study by Orgambídez-Ramos et al., 2014) and .87 for OP (.89 in the study by Vallerand et al., 2003; .93 in the study by Gonçalves et al., 2014; .94 in the study by Orgambídez-Ramos et al., 2014), confirming a good internal consistency of the scales.

A limitation of the present study is the use of a self-report questionnaire and a cross-sectional research design that does not permit to establish sure relations of causality between variables. Another limitation is the small samples used in both steps of analysis and the random sampling techniques that do not allow to have representative samples. This is a preliminary study adaptation, but a future continuance of the psychometric evaluation of the scale could find useful to increase the number of participants. This could also be functional to verify the deletion of item 7, even if already another study (Gonçalves et al., 2014) highlighted problems with this item. Moreover, enlarging the sample would allow performing a multi-group confirmatory factor analysis, which could be very informative in the adaptation of the scale to work domain.

To conclude, this study showed that the Italian version of the Passion Scale applied to work can be measured in a reliably way, also considering the good psychometric characteristics. In this sense, the scale can be used in applied research to assess the passion for work activities in organizational contexts. Considering the extensive interest for the passion construct and the different languages through which it is being more and more detected, the present Italian scale could represent both a contribution to the passion construct that can be measured also among Italian workers, and in general to the study on passion for work. Beyond this, organizational surveys would investigate also the relationship between perception of passion and well-being/distress experience among workers, allowing the reflection on work dynamics. Human resources managers could find the awareness of these working aspects useful in order to project interventions to: develop the positive side of passion, make workers aware of the risks associated to an obsessive relation with work, and develop and diffuse well-being practice oriented to awareness, such as individuals’ skills evaluations and focused training for supervisors and employees.

Conflict of Interest

The authors of this article declare no conflict of interest.