The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Contribution of Content, Context, and Process to Understanding Openness to Organizational Change: Two Experimental Simulation Studies
Abstract
The authors examined the contribution of the content, context, and process of organizational transformation to employees' openness to change. The authors predicted that 5 factors would have a positive effect on openness to change: (a) threatening character of organizational change (content related), (b) trust in executive management (context related), (c) trust in the supervisor (context related), (d) history of change (context related), and (e) participation in the change effort (process related). The authors tested their hypotheses in 2 separate studies (N = 828 and N = 835) using an experimental simulation strategy. The first study crossed 4 variables in a completely randomized 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design. Results showed significant main effects for content, context, and process but no significant interaction effects. A second study, with a completely randomized 2 x 2 factorial design, crossed two context variables. Results showed a significant main and an interaction effect: Openness to change decreased dramatically only when history of change and trust in executive management were low.
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
(1998) · Cited by 36,049
Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
Rotter, J. B. (1966) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0092976 · Cited by 21,937
Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency
Bandura, A. (1982) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122 · Cited by 15,975
Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences
Kirk, R. (2013) · doi:10.4135/9781483384733 · Cited by 8,539
Field Theory in Social Science
French, R. L., Lewin, K., & Cartwright, D. (1953) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1418749 · Cited by 5,190
Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment
(1978) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/0149-7189(78)90042-3 · Cited by 3,946
Leading change: why transformation efforts fail
Kotter, J. P. (2009) · IEEE Engineering Management Review · doi:10.1109/emr.2009.5235501 · Cited by 3,566
The Essential Impact of Context on Organizational Behavior
Johns, G. (2006) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2006.20208687 · Cited by 3,532
Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing together the Old and the New Institutionalism
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259163 · Cited by 3,214
A Review of Scale Development Practices in the Study of Organizations
Hinkin, T. R. (1995) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639502100509 · Cited by 3,193
Cited by
Change Readiness: A Multilevel Review
Rafferty, A. E., Jimmieson, N. L., & Armenakis, A. A. (2013) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206312457417 · Cited by 679
Employees' attitudes toward organizational change: A literature review
Choi, M. (2011) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.20434 · Cited by 520
Metadata
- Authors
- Devos, G., Buelens, M., & Bouckenooghe, D.
- Venue
- The Journal of Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-12
- Volume
- 147
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 607-630
- ISSN
- 0022-4545 (ISSN-L)
- 1940-1183
- OpenAlex
- W2051667073
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 70
- FWCI
- 14.10
- 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: Contribution of Content, Context, and Process to Understanding Openness to Organizational Change: Two Experimental Simulation Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3200/socp.147.6.607-630
- The paper
- Devos, G., Buelens, M., & Bouckenooghe, D. (2007). Contribution of Content, Context, and Process to Understanding Openness to Organizational Change: Two Experimental Simulation Studies. The Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3200/socp.147.6.607-630
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.