CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 185Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorSocial Power and Status DynamicsExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A test and refinement of the equity sensitivity construct

King, Wesley C., Miles, Edward W., Day, D. David·1993·Journal of Organizational Behavior
DOI 10.1002/job.4030140403
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper reports results from two studies that test a refinement of the equity sensitivity construct first in an experimental setting and second in a field setting. Results from Study 1 show that benevolents express tolerance for both overreward and underreward relative to entitleds and equity sensitives and that benevolents report relatively high levels of satisfaction regardless of reward condition. Study 1 results also show that manipulation of outcomes produce a more dramatic effect on satisfaction than does manipulation of inputs. Results from Study 2 reveal significantly different exchange ideologies for benevolents and entitleds and show that entitleds place more importance on pay whereas benevolents place more importance on the work itself. For both benevolents and entitleds, there is a positive correlation between assessments of distributive justice and job satisfaction. Implication of the findings both for equity theory research and the practice of management are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/job.4030140403

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.844 · DOI
  2. 10.2307/257990 · DOI
  3. 10.2307/258531 · DOI
  4. 10.1037/0021-9010.76.1.31 · DOI
  5. Smith P. C., 1969, The Measurement of Satisfaction in Work and Retirement

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–185 of 185

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
King, W. C., Miles, E. W., & Day, D. D.
Affiliations
  • Miami University (US)
  • Georgia State University (US)
  • Columbia College - South Carolina (US)
Corresponding author
King, Wesley C.
ORCID
Miles, Edward W.
Venue
Journal of Organizational Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-07
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
301-317
ISSN
  • 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1379
DOI
10.1002/job.4030140403
OpenAlex
W1966424737
Cited by
185
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 13
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 4891 d)
Locations
Journal of Organizational Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
equity sensitivity, equity theory, distributive justice, job satisfaction, benevolence, entitlement, exchange ideology, management practices

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