A profile of profiles: A meta-analysis of the nomological net of commitment profiles.

Adam H. Kabins, X. Xu, M. Bergman, Christopher M. Berry, V. Willson
{"title":"A profile of profiles: A meta-analysis of the nomological net of commitment profiles.","authors":"Adam H. Kabins, X. Xu, M. Bergman, Christopher M. Berry, V. Willson","doi":"10.1037/apl0000091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the majority of empirical commitment research has adopted a variable-centered approach, the person-centered or profiles approach is gaining traction. One challenge in the commitment profiles literature is that names are attached to profiles based on the within-study comparison among profiles and their relative levels and shapes. Thus, it is possible that different studies name the same profiles differently or different profiles similarly because of the context of the other profiles in the study. A meta-analytic approach, combined with multilevel latent profile analysis (LPA) that accounts for both within- and between-sample variability, is used in this study to examine the antecedents and outcomes of commitment profiles. This helps solve the naming problem by examining multiple data sets (K = 40) with a large sample (N = 16,052), obtained by contacting commitment researchers who voluntarily supplied primary data to bring further consensus about the phenomenology of profiles. LPA results revealed 5 profiles (Low, Moderate, AC-dominant, AC/NC-dominant, and High). Meta-analytic results revealed that high levels of bases of commitment were associated with value-based profiles whereas low levels were associated with weak commitment profiles. Additionally, value-based profiles were associated with older, married, and less educated participants than the weak commitment profiles. Regarding outcomes of commitment, profiles were found to significantly relate to focal behaviors (e.g., performance, tenure, and turnover) and discretionary behaviors (e.g., organizational citizenship behaviors). Value-based profiles were found to have higher levels of both focal and discretionary behaviors for all analyses. Implications for the commitment and profile literature are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record","PeriodicalId":169654,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of applied psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"51","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of applied psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000091","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 51

Abstract

Although the majority of empirical commitment research has adopted a variable-centered approach, the person-centered or profiles approach is gaining traction. One challenge in the commitment profiles literature is that names are attached to profiles based on the within-study comparison among profiles and their relative levels and shapes. Thus, it is possible that different studies name the same profiles differently or different profiles similarly because of the context of the other profiles in the study. A meta-analytic approach, combined with multilevel latent profile analysis (LPA) that accounts for both within- and between-sample variability, is used in this study to examine the antecedents and outcomes of commitment profiles. This helps solve the naming problem by examining multiple data sets (K = 40) with a large sample (N = 16,052), obtained by contacting commitment researchers who voluntarily supplied primary data to bring further consensus about the phenomenology of profiles. LPA results revealed 5 profiles (Low, Moderate, AC-dominant, AC/NC-dominant, and High). Meta-analytic results revealed that high levels of bases of commitment were associated with value-based profiles whereas low levels were associated with weak commitment profiles. Additionally, value-based profiles were associated with older, married, and less educated participants than the weak commitment profiles. Regarding outcomes of commitment, profiles were found to significantly relate to focal behaviors (e.g., performance, tenure, and turnover) and discretionary behaviors (e.g., organizational citizenship behaviors). Value-based profiles were found to have higher levels of both focal and discretionary behaviors for all analyses. Implications for the commitment and profile literature are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
档案的档案:承诺档案的法理学网的元分析。
虽然大多数实证承诺研究采用了以变量为中心的方法,但以人为中心或概况的方法正在获得关注。承诺概要文献中的一个挑战是,名字是基于概要及其相对水平和形状之间的研究内部比较而附加到概要上的。因此,由于研究中其他概况的背景,不同的研究可能对相同的概况命名不同或相似。本研究采用荟萃分析方法,结合考虑样本内和样本间变异性的多层次潜在剖面分析(LPA),来检验承诺概况的前因和结果。这有助于通过大样本(N = 16,052)检查多个数据集(K = 40)来解决命名问题,这些数据集是通过联系自愿提供原始数据的承诺研究人员获得的,以进一步达成关于概况现象学的共识。LPA结果显示了5个特征(低、中、AC主导、AC/ nc主导和高)。元分析结果显示,高水平的承诺基础与基于价值的承诺档案相关,而低水平的承诺基础与弱承诺档案相关。此外,基于价值观的档案与年龄较大、已婚、受教育程度较低的参与者相关联,而不是弱承诺档案。关于承诺的结果,我们发现概况与焦点行为(如绩效、任期和离职)和自由裁量行为(如组织公民行为)显著相关。发现基于价值的概况在所有分析中都具有较高的焦点和自由裁量行为水平。对承诺和概况文献的含义进行了讨论。(PsycINFO数据库记录
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The benefits of reflecting on gratitude received at home for leaders at work: Insights from three field experiments. Personality and leadership: Meta-analytic review of cross-cultural moderation, behavioral mediation, and honesty-humility. Newcomers building social capital by proactive networking: A signaling perspective. Supportive, resistant, or both? A person-centric view on employee responses to diversity initiatives. A regulatory focus theory perspective on the dynamics between action and power.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1