Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Identification and Some Conditions of Organizational Involvement

Brown, Michael E.·1969·Administrative Science Quarterly

Abstract

Eight hundred thirty four employees in twenty-six organization branches of the Tennessee Valley Authority participated in a survey. Indices were constructed to test a set of hypotheses concerning correlates of identification with the organization. It was predicted that individuals would tend to identify with the organization in three situations: (1) where they saw the organization as providing opportunities for personal achievement; (2) where they had power within the organization; (3) where there were no competing sources of identification. The hypotheses were based on a distinction between two types of satisfactions available within work organizations, symbolic (i.e., achievement-oriented) and pragmatic. Analysis of identification indicated that it depends on the presence of opportunities to satisfy symbolic motivational states. It also indicated that identification as a mode of orientation can be distinguished from other apparently similar modes such as satisfaction. The findings supported the hypotheses, indicating that identification can be observed and that it is related to a distinct worker perspective.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2391129

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Brown, M. E.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1969-09
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
346
ISSN
0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2317450717
Cited by
295
References
0
FWCI
0.00
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.