The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mutuality and Reciprocity in the Psychological Contracts of Employees and Employers.
Abstract
The authors assessed the joint perceptions of the employee and his or her employer to examine mutuality and reciprocity in the employment relationship. Paired psychological contract reports were obtained from 80 employee-employer dyads in 16 university-based research centers. On the basis of in-depth study of the research setting, research directors were identified as primary agents for the university (employer) in shaping the terms of employment of staff scientists (employees). By assessing the extent of consistency between employee and employer beliefs regarding their exchange agreement, the present study mapped the variation and consequences of mutuality and reciprocity in psychological contracts. Results indicate that both mutuality and reciprocity are positively related to archival indicators of research productivity and career advancement, in addition to self-reported measures of Met Expectations and intention to continue working with the employer. Implications for psychological contract theory are presented.
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
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement
Gouldner, A. W. (1960) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2092623 · Cited by 12,001
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 1×
“Under the general norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960), recipients of help, contributions, or beneficial treatment not only increase their liking for the giver but also seek to reciprocate as means of restoring the balance in the relationship (e.g., DePaulo, Brittingham, & Kaiser, 1983; Eisenberger et al., 1986; Green…”
BackgroundTests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245 · Cited by 4,621
Psychological Contracts in Organizations: Understanding Written and Unwritten Agreements
Rousseau, D. (1995) · doi:10.4135/9781452231594 · Cited by 3,453
Self-citationRousseau, D. M. (1990) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.4030110506 · Cited by 1,811
Self-citationEDWARDS, J. R., & PARRY, M. E. (1993) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256822 · Cited by 1,534
DEVELOPMENT OF A LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE: A LONGITUDINAL TEST.
BAUER, T. N., & GREEN, S. G. (1996) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/257068 · Cited by 944
Cited by
Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R., & McDonnell, A. (2020) · Human Resource Management Journal · doi:10.1111/1748-8583.12258 · Cited by 1,050
I-Deals: Idiosyncratic Terms in Employment Relationships
Rousseau, D. M., Ho, V. T., & Greenberg, J. (2006) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2006.22527470 · Cited by 652
Self-citationDoing Well by Making Well: The Impact of Corporate Wellness Programs on Employee Productivity
Gubler, T., Larkin, I., & Pierce, L. (2018) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2017.2883 · Cited by 222
Different relationships for coping with ambiguity and uncertainty in organizations
Saint-Charles, J., & Mongeau, P. (2009) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2008.09.001 · Cited by 91
Reciprocity and incentive pay in the workplace
Dur, R., Non, A., & Roelfsema, H. (2010) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2010.05.001 · Cited by 50
Manager-employee psychological contracts: enter the smartphone
Obushenkova, E., Plester, B., & Haworth, N. (2018) · Employee Relations · doi:10.1108/er-02-2017-0040 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Dabos, G. E., & Rousseau, D. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 52-72
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2147631633
- Cited by
- 605
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 37.30
- 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.
