The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Placing perceptions of politics in the context of the feedback environment, employee attitudes, and job performance.
Abstract
The authors proposed a model suggesting that organizational environments supporting high levels of informal supervisor and coworker feedback are associated with lower employee perceptions of organizational politics. Furthermore, these lowered perceptions of politics were proposed to result in higher employee morale (as reflected in job satisfaction and affective commitment) and, through morale, to higher levels of task performance and organizational citizenship. The proposed mediational model was supported with empirical results from 150 subordinate-supervisor dyads sampled across a variety of organizations. Higher quality feedback environments were associated with lower perceptions of organizational politics, and morale mediated the relationships between organizational politics and various aspects of work performance. These findings suggest that when employees have greater access to information regarding behaviors that are acceptable and desired at work, perceptions of politics are reduced and work outcomes are enhanced.
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
Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.4.422 · Cited by 11,335
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920630002600307 · Cited by 5,897
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
The job satisfaction–job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review.
Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376 · Cited by 4,760
Meta-Analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827 · Cited by 3,005
Feedback as an individual resource: Personal strategies of creating information
Ashford, S. J., & Cummings, L. L. (1983) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(83)90156-3 · Cited by 1,309
Cited by
Chang, C.-H., Rosen, C. C., & Levy, P. E. (2009) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2009.43670894 · Cited by 616
Self-citationAnseel, F., Beatty, A. S., Shen, W., Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2015) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206313484521 · Cited by 531
Abbas, M., Raja, U., Darr, W., & Bouckenooghe, D. (2014) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206312455243 · Cited by 521
Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement
A. Agarwal, U. (2014) · Personnel Review · doi:10.1108/pr-02-2012-0019 · Cited by 389
Kennedy, S. P., & Garewal, K. R. (2020) · The Journal of Academic Librarianship · doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102191 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Rosen, C. C., Levy, P. E., & Hall, R. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2006
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 211-220
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2095461663
- Cited by
- 302
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 20.50
- 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: Placing perceptions of politics in the context of the feedback environment, employee attitudes, and job performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.211
- The paper
- Rosen, C. C., Levy, P. E., & Hall, R. J. (2006). Placing perceptions of politics in the context of the feedback environment, employee attitudes, and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.211
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.
