The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The relationship between affective and normative commitment: review and research agenda
Abstract
Meyer and Allen's (1991, 1997) three component conceptualization of organizational commitment (OC) includes affective (AC), continuance (CC), and normative (NC) commitment. However, AC and NC have not been as empirically differentiated as theoretically expected. Drawing on the extant literature, I review, integrate, and expand on arguments and evidence about the lack of AC‐NC differentiation. I also propose several avenues for research that could help commitment scholars attain a clearer picture of the true relationship between AC and NC, as the extant literature has inadequately addressed many issues regarding construct differentiation. Specific, testable propositions address a variety of facets of the commitment literature, including construct definition and measurement, developmental processes, relationships among the components and their unique and joint effects on outcomes, and potential moderators of the AC‐NC relationship. The goal of this paper is to spur future research into the AC‐NC relationship in order to gain greater construct clarity. Copyright © 2006 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
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241 · cited 2×
“The proposed moderation by societal values could be explained through cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957), at least in individualist societies where cultural norms suggest that one should do what onewants to do (Hofstede, 1980).”
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
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
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.108.2.171 · Cited by 6,449
Psychological Contracts in Organizations: Understanding Written and Unwritten Agreements
Rousseau, D. (1995) · doi:10.4135/9781452231594 · Cited by 3,453
Multidimensional constructs in organizational behavior research: an integrative analytical framework
Edwards, J. R. (2001) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/109442810142004 · Cited by 1,128
Cited by
A Study of the Antecedents and Consequences of Psychological Ownership in Organizational Settings
Mayhew, M. G., Ashkanasy, N. M., Bramble, T., & Gardner, J. (2007) · The Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.3200/socp.147.5.477-500 · Cited by 355
Affective, normative, and continuance commitment levels across cultures: A meta-analysis
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Jackson, T. A., McInnis, K. J., Maltin, E. R., & Sheppard, L. (2012) · Journal of Vocational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.09.005 · Cited by 286
Does perceived inclusion matter in the workplace?
Chen, C., & Tang, N. (2018) · Journal of Managerial Psychology · doi:10.1108/jmp-02-2017-0078 · Cited by 96
Sumaedi, S., Juniarti, R. P., & Bakti, I. G. M. Y. (2015) · Journal of Islamic Marketing · doi:10.1108/jima-06-2013-0045 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Bergman, M. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-06-21
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 645-663
- ISSN
- 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1379
- OpenAlex
- W2113528783
- Cited by
- 328
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 19.22
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The relationship between affective and normative commitment: review and research agenda. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/job.372
- The paper
- Bergman, M. E. (2006). The relationship between affective and normative commitment: review and research agenda. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.372
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.
