The Interactive Effects of Psychological Contract Breach and Organizational Politics on Perceived Organizational Support: Evidence from Two Longitudinal Studies

153 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

HRM Practices, Organizational Citizenship Behaviour, and Performance: A Multi-Level Analysis (2010, unknown): “Kuvaas (2008) found that the positive relationship between ‘developmental human resource practices’ and work performance was not mediated by perceived organizational support, affective commitment, or organizational justice (procedural or interactional).”
If You Wrong Us, Shall We Not Revenge? Moderating Roles of Self-Control and Perceived Aggressive Work Culture in Predicting Responses to Psychological Contract Breach (2015, background): “Notably, the idiosyncratic nature of psychological contracts and the rapidly changing business environment have made breach a common (Robinson & Morrison, 2000) or even inevitable (Kiewitz, Restubog, Zagenczyk, & Hochwarter, 2009; Low & Bordia, 2011) occurrence in today’s organizations.”
Investigating the Moderating Effects of Leader–Member Exchange in the Psychological Contract Breach–Employee Performance Relationship: A Test of Two Competing Perspectives (2009, background): “A thorough examination of these factors may provide a detailed analysis to explain the role of causal attributions in the psychological contract-making (Kiewitz et al., 2009).”
Faculty Experiences with Bullying in Higher Education (2010, background): “To the extent that these expectations go unmet, psychological contract breach occurs (Kiewitz et al., 2009) and reactive aggression is more likely to occur.”