Social Undermining and Three Forms of Organizational Commitment
Emma Lei Jing, Ian R. Gellatly, Justin R. Feeney, Michelle Inness
Abstract
Emma Lei Jing, Ian R. Gellatly, Justin R. Feeney, Michelle Inness
Abstract
Abstract. In this study, we set out to challenge the widely held belief that mistreatment will always lower feelings of organizational commitment. We test this widespread belief by examining the relationship between social undermining (SU) and three forms of organizational commitment, affective, normative, and continuance commitment. Using time-lagged data provided by an online panel of 626 working adults, we found that exposure to SU lowered reported levels of affective (emotion-based) and normative (obligation-based) commitment but increased the level of continuance (economic-based) commitment. Subsequent moderated regression analyses revealed that the negative relations between SU and both affective and normative commitment were nuanced – they were both stronger for individuals whose anxious attachment was low rather than high. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract. In this study, we set out to challenge the widely held belief that mistreatment will always lower feelings of organizational commitment. We test this widespread belief by examining the relationship between social undermining (SU) and three forms of organizational commitment, affective, normative, and continuance commitment. Using time-lagged data provided by an online panel of 626 working adults, we found that exposure to SU lowered reported levels of affective (emotion-based) and normative (obligation-based) commitment but increased the level of continuance (economic-based) commitment. Subsequent moderated regression analyses revealed that the negative relations between SU and both affective and normative commitment were nuanced – they were both stronger for individuals whose anxious attachment was low rather than high. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Key concepts: Organizational commitment, Psychology, Social psychology, Normative, Continuance, Obligation, Affective events theory, Feeling