The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Perceived organizational support
Abstract
Perceived organizational support (POS) is defined as employees’ beliefs concerning the extent to which their organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being. A considerable body of evidence indicates that the more employees experience a high POS, the more they are likely to develop commitment toward their organization. Particularly, POS is the strongest driver of affective organizational commitment. The objective of this chapter is fourfold. First, the authors review the literature linking POS to the three dimensions of organizational commitment delineated by Meyer and Allen (1991) and detail the mechanisms underlying these relationships. Second, they extend their review to other sources of perceived support and other foci of commitment. Third, they consider new suggestions for future research on support and commitment. Finally, they conclude with a discussion of practical implications of support_commitment relationships. Reference: Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61_89.
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
Armeli, S., Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. M., & Lynch, P. (1998) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-9010.83.2.288 · Cited by 600
Self-citation
Cited by
Nahrgang, J. D., Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0021484 · Cited by 1,632
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson, M. J. (2013) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031757 · Cited by 1,462
At What Level (and in Whom) We Trust: Trust Across Multiple Organizational Levels
Fulmer, C. A., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206312439327 · Cited by 886
Alfes, K., Shantz, A. D., Truss, C., & Soane, E. C. (2013) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2012.679950 · Cited by 770
The Motivation at Work Scale: Validation Evidence in Two Languages
Gagné, M., Forest, J., Gilbert, M.-H., Aubé, C., Morin, E., & Malorni, A. (2010) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164409355698 · Cited by 770
Metadata
- Authors
- Stinglhamber, F., Caesens, G., Clark, L., & Eisenberger, R.
- Venue
- Handbook of Employee Commitment
- Publisher
- Edward Elgar Publishing
- Published
- 2016-10-28
- OpenAlex
- W3195312163
- Cited by
- 689
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 33.01
- Type
- book chapter
- 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: Perceived organizational support. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4337/9781784711740.00037
- The paper
- Stinglhamber, F., Caesens, G., Clark, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2016). Perceived organizational support. Handbook of Employee Commitment. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711740.00037
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.
