Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: a meta‐analysis

verifiedrich profile · Journal of Organizational Behavior · 2002

Riketta, Michael

10.1002/job.141 · CrossRef: verified

How this was studied

paradigm: positivistpurpose: explanatory causaldesign: meta analytic synthesisidentification: nonetime: cross sectionaldata: quantitative survey

A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.

analysis: meta analysis · validity (validity): internal unclear · external addressed · construct addressed · statistical addressed · classifier confidence 0.85

What this article reports

The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.

affective commitmentoverall job performance

r = 0.2 · k=111 · grade A · unverified

organizational commitmenttask performance

r = 0.2 · k=111 · grade A · unverified

organizational commitmenttask performance

r = 0.2 · k=93 · grade A · unverified

Models this article informs

The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.

In the authors’ words

The article’s own abstract.

Abstract A meta‐analysis was conducted to estimate the true correlation between attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance and to identify moderators of this correlation. One‐hundred and eleven samples from 93 published studies were included. The corrected mean correlation was 0.20. The correlation was at least marginally significantly stronger for: (a) extra‐role performance as opposed to in‐role performance; (b) white‐collar workers as opposed to blue‐collar workers; and (c) performance assessed by self ratings as opposed to supervisor ratings or objective indicators. Four other assumed moderators (commitment measure: Affective Commitment Scale versus Organizational Commitment Questionnaire, job level, age, and tenure) did not have at least marginally significant effects. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

What the literature says about it

Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.

8 supporting

Ancillary research

Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.

Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.