The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Organizations and supervisors as sources of support and targets of commitment: a longitudinal study
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to examine the relationship between perceived support and affective commitment, and the linkages between these constructs and some of their common antecedents and consequences. More precisely, using a sample of 238 employees, we conducted a longitudinal study to examine the linkages between the favorableness of intrinsically and extrinsically satisfying job conditions, perceived organizational support, perceived supervisor support, affective commitment to the organization and supervisor, and turnover. Affective commitment to the supervisor was found to completely mediate the effect of perceived supervisor support on turnover, whereas neither perceived organizational support nor organizational affective commitment were significantly related to turnover. Perceived organizational support partially mediated the effect of favorable intrinsically satisfying job conditions on organizational affective commitment and fully mediated the effect of extrinsically satisfying job conditions on organizational affective commitment. Finally, perceived supervisor support totally mediated the effect of favorable intrinsically satisfying job conditions on affective commitment to the supervisor. As a whole, findings suggest that exchange relationships between employees and their supervisors should be further investigated in future turnover research. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement
Gouldner, A. W. (1960) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2092623 · Cited by 12,001
A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-z · Cited by 11,049
Perceived organizational support.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500 · Cited by 10,023
Cited by
Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1332 · Cited by 2,303
Shanock, L. R., & Eisenberger, R. (2006) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.689 · Cited by 1,096
A person‐centered approach to commitment research: Theory, research, and methodology
Meyer, J. P., & Morin, A. J. S. (2016) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2085 · Cited by 487
Charoensukmongkol, P., & Phungsoonthorn, T. (2021) · The Journal of General Psychology · doi:10.1080/00221309.2020.1795613 · Cited by 182
Knudsen, H. K., Ducharme, L. J., & Roman, P. M. (2008) · Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment · doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2008.02.003 · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Stinglhamber, F., & Vandenberghe, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-03-05
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 251-270
- ISSN
- 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1379
- OpenAlex
- W1968675979
- Cited by
- 598
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 16.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.