The Journal of applied psychology
-
Self-regulation theories are paving the way to integrating motivational theories of behavior. However, a review of the motivation literature reveals several possible relationships between self-efficacy and motivation. ⋯ Consistent with a multiple goal process conceptualization, self-efficacy was found to relate positively to directing resources toward a goal but negatively to the magnitude of resources allocated for accepted goals. Differences in methods are used to reconcile current and past findings.
-
The present study tested the effect of work-family conflict on emotions and the moderating effects of gender role orientation. On the basis of a multilevel design, the authors found that family-interfering-with- work was positively related to guilt, and gender role orientation interacted with both types of conflict (work-interfering-with-family and family-interfering-with-work) to predict guilt. Specifically, in general, traditional individuals experienced more guilt from family-interfering-with-work, and egalitarian individuals experienced more guilt from work-interfering-with-family. Additionally, a higher level interaction indicated that traditional men tended to experience a stronger relationship between family-interfering-with-work and guilt than did egalitarian men or women of either gender role orientation.
-
Despite the fact that several studies have investigated the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and performance appraisal ratings, the vast majority of these studies have been cross-sectional, correlational investigations conducted in organizational settings that do not allow researchers to establish the causal nature of this relationship. To address this lack of knowledge regarding causality, the authors conducted 2 studies designed to investigate the effects of task performance, helping behavior, voice, and organizational loyalty on performance appraisal evaluations. Findings demonstrated that each of these forms of behavior has significant effects on performance evaluation decisions and suggest that additional attention should be directed at both voice and organizational loyalty as important forms of citizenship behavior aimed at the organization.
-
This article offers a conceptual critique of the three-component model (TCM) of organizational commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990) and proposes a reconceptualization based on standard attitude theory. The authors use the attitude-behavior model by Eagly and Chaiken (1993) to demonstrate that the TCM combines fundamentally different attitudinal phenomena. They argue that general organizational commitment can best be understood as an attitude regarding the organization, while normative and continuance commitment are attitudes regarding specific forms of behavior (i.e., staying or leaving). ⋯ The authors suggest that the use of the TCM be restricted to this purpose and that Eagly and Chaiken's model be adopted as a generic commitment model template from which a range of models for predicting specific organizational behaviors can be extracted. Finally, they discuss the definition and measurement of the organizational commitment attitude. Covering the affective, cognitive, and behavioral facets of this attitude helps to enhance construct validity and to differentiate the construct from other constructs.
-
Fairness theory (R. Folger & R. Cropanzano, 1998, 2001) postulates that, particularly in the face of unfavorable outcomes, employees judge an organizational authority to be more responsible for their outcomes when the authority exhibits lower procedural fairness. ⋯ Furthermore, 2 of the studies showed that attributions of responsibility to the authority mediated the relationship between the authority's procedural fairness and employees' reactions to unfavorable outcomes. The findings (a) provide support for a key assumption of fairness theory, (b) help to account for the pervasive interactive effect of procedural fairness and outcome favorability on employees' attitudes and behaviors, and (c) contribute to an emerging trend in justice research concerned with how people use procedural fairness information to make attributions of responsibility for their outcomes. Practical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research also are discussed.