Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Individual differences, psychological contract breach, and organizational citizenship behavior: A moderated mediation study

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines two competing theories. Self-enhancement theory predicts that self-esteem and equity sensitivity (narrow traits) increase the perception of psychological contract breach and engage less in organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), whereas self-consistency theory predicts that these two traits attenuate the perception of psychological contract breach and engage more in OCB. Agreeableness and Conscientiousness (broad traits) are expected to moderate the mediation. This study employs moderated mediation analysis to test a sample of 204 supervisor–subordinate dyads from two theme parks in northern and central Taiwan. The results show that employees high in self-esteem are less likely to perceive psychological contract breach and engage more in OCB, confirming self-consistency theory. The results also show that this mediation is observed when Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are higher than when they are lower. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The internal inconsistency may be due to the forced-distribution scale used in Huseman et al.’s (1985) ESI measure because the forced-distribution are less likely to make respondents resistant to response distortion (Liguori, Taylor, Kluemper, & Sauley, 2011).

References

  • Adams, G. L., Treadway, D. C., & Stepina, L. P. 2008. The role of dispositions in politics perception formation: The predictive capacity of negative and positive affectivity, equity sensitivity, and self-efficacy. Journal of Managerial Issues, 10(4): 545–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. S. 1965. Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology: 267–299. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahadi, S. A., & Rothbart, M. K. 1994. Temperament, development, and the big five. In C. F. Halverson, G. A. Kohnstamm, & R. P. Martin (Eds.). The developing structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood: 189–207. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashford, S. J., & Tsui, A. S. 1991. Self-regulation for managerial effectiveness: The role of active feedback seeking. Academy of Management Journal, 34(2): 251–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. 1991. The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1): 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Straus, J. P. 1993. Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5): 715–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaine, B., & Crocker, J. 1993. Self-esteem and self-serving biases in reactions to positive and negative events: An integrative review. In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.). Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard: 55–85. New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bliese, P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.). Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions: 349–381. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, G. W. 1978. Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the fact or fiction question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(1): 56–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. 1970. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3): 185–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J. 1988. Self-esteem at work: Research, theory, and practice. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brutus, S., Ruderman, M. N., Ohlott, P. J., & McCauley, C. D. 2000. Developing from job experiences: The role of organization-based self-esteem. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(4): 367–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. 1981. Attention and self-regulation: A control-theory approach to human behavior. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., Friedman, R., Yu, E., & Sun, F. 2011. Examining the positive and negative effects of guanxi practice: A multi-level analysis of guanxi practices and procedural justice perceptions. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(4): 715–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. 2007. Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the academy of management journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6): 1281–1303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. 1998. Traits theory of personality. In D. F. Barone, M. Hersen & V. B. V. Hasselt (Eds.). Advanced personality, the plenum series in social/clinical psychology: 103–1021. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyle-Shapiro, J., & Kessler, I. 2000. Consequences of the psychological contract for the employment relationship: A large scale survey. Journal of Management Studies, 37(7): 903–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vos, A., & Meganck, A. 2009. What HR managers do versus what employees value: Exploring both parties’ views on retention management from a psychological contract perspective. Personnel Review, 38(1): 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale development. Newbury Park, NJ: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyne, L. V., & Ang, S. 1998. Organizational citizenship behavior of contingent worker in Singapore. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6): 692–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gecas, V. 1982. The self-concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 8: 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gecas, V., & Schwalbe, M. L. 1983. Beyond the looking-glass self: Social structure and efficacy-based self-esteem. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46(2): 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. 1990. An alternative “description of personality”: the big five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6): 1216–1229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. 1992. The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1): 26–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graziano, W. G., Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Hair, E. C. 1996. Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: The case for agreeableness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(4): 820–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graziano, W. G., & Tobin, R. M. 2002. Agreeableness: Dimension of personality or social desirability artifact?. Journal of Personality, 70(5): 695–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, V. T., Weingart, L. R., & Rousseau, D. M. 2004. Responses to broken promises: Does personality matter?. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(2): 276–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, R. H., & Kenny, D. A. 1999. Statistical power and tests of mediation. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.). Statistical strategies for small sample research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hui, C., Lee, C., & Rousseau, D. M. 2004. Psychological contract and organizational citizenship behavior in China: Investigating generalizability and instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2): 311–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huseman, R. C., Hatfield, J. D., & Mile, E. W. 1985. Test for individual perceptions of job equity: Some preliminary findings. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61(3): 1055–1064.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huseman, R. C., Hatfield, J. D., & Miles, E. W. 1987. A new perspective on equity theory: The equity sensitivity construct. Academy of Management Review, 12(2): 222–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. 2001. Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict. Journal of Personality, 69(2): 323–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Rosselli, M., Workman, K. A., Santisi, M., Rios, J. D., & Bojan, D. 2002. Agreeableness, conscientiousness, and effortful control processes. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(5): 476–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John, O. P. 1990. The big five factor taxonomy: Dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research: 66–100. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. C. 1973. Self and interpersonal evaluations: Esteem theories versus consistency theories. Psychological Bulletin, 79(3): 185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. 1997. The dispositional cause of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19: 151–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3): 422–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kickul, J., & Lester, S. W. 2001. Broken promises: Equity sensitivity as a moderator between psychological contract breach and employee attitudes and behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(2): 191–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, W. C., & Miles, E. W. 1994. The measurement of equity sensitivity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67(2): 133–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, W. C., Miles, E. W., & Day, D. D. 1993. A test and refinement of the equity sensitivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(4): 301–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, B. J., & Koch, P. 2007. Collectivism, individualism, and outgroup cooperation in a segmented China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(2): 207–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korman, A. K. 1976. Hypothesis of work behavior revisited and an extension. Academy of Management Review, 1(1): 50–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, S. J. 2000. Added benefits: The link between work-life benefits and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5): 801–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liguori, E. W., Taylor, S. G., Kluemper, D. H., & Sauley, K. S. 2011. Testing measures of equity sensitivity for resistance to response distortion. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(1): 46–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1): 83–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. 1987. Validation of a five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1): 81–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarlin, D. B., & Blascovich, J. 1981. Effects of self-esteem and performance feedback on future affective preferences and cognitive expectations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(3): 521–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, E. W., Hatfield, J. D., & Huseman, R. C. 1994. Equity sensitivity and outcome importance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(7): 585–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, E. W., Hatfield, J. D., & Huseman, R. C. 1989. The equity sensitivity construct: Potential implications for worker performance. Journal of Management, 15(4): 581–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. T., & Ross, M. 1975. Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction?. Psychological Bulletin, 82(2): 231–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. 1997. When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22(1): 226–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moy, J. W., & Lam, K. F. 2004. Selection criteria and the impact of personality on getting hired. Personnel Review, 33(5): 521–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikolaou, I., Tomprou, M., & Vakola, M. 2007. Individuals’ inducements and the role of personality: Implications for psychological contracts. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(7): 649–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northcraft, G. B., & Ashford, S. J. 1990. The preservation of self in everyday life: The effects of performance expectations and feedback context on feedback inquiry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47(1): 42–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh, I.-S., Wang, G., & Mount, M. K. 2011. Validity of observer ratings of the five-factor model of personality traits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4): 762–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. 1989. Organization-based self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3): 622–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavior research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. 2004. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4): 717–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. 2007. Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1): 185–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raja, U., Johns, G., & Ntalianis, F. 2004. The impact of personality on psychological contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3): 350–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Restubog, S. L. D., Bordia, P., & Bordia, S. 2009. The interactive effects of procedural justice and equity sensitivity in predicting responses to psychological contract breach: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(2): 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Restubog, S. L. D., Bordia, P., & Tang, R. L. 2007. Behavioural outcomes of psychological contract breach in a non-western culture: The moderating role of equity sensitivity. British Journal of Management, 18(4): 376–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D., & Smith-Lovin, L. 1992. Selective interaction as a strategy for identity maintenance and affect control model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55(1): 12–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L. 1996. Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4): 574–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. 1995. Psychological contracts and OCB: The effect of unfulfilled obligations on civic virtue behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(3): 289–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M., Schooler, C., Schoenback, C., & Rosenberg, F. 1995. Global self-esteem and specific self-esteem. American Sociological Review, 60(1): 141–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M. 1989. Psychological can implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2): 121–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M. 1990. New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s obligations: A study of psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(5): 389–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M. 1995. Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., & Tijoriwala, S. A. 1998. Assessing psychological contracts: Issues, alternatives and types of measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(1): 679–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saucier, G. 1994. Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar big-five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63(3): 506–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N. 1994. Method bias: The importance to theory and measurement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(5): 393–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shih, C. T., & Chen, S. J. 2011. The social dilemma perspective on psychological contract fulfillment and organizational citizenship behavior. Management and Organization Review, 7(1): 125–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shoda, Y., & Mischel, W. 1993. Cognitive social approach to dispositional inferences: What if the perceiver is a cognitive social theorist?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(5): 547–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4): 422–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skarlicki, D. P., Folger, R., & Tesluk, P. 1999. Personality as a moderator in the relationship between fairness and retaliation. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1): 100–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, M. L., Stephan, W. G., & Rosenfield, D. 1978. Egotism and attribution. In J. H. Harvey Wickes & R. F. Kidd (Eds.). New directions in attribution research: 91–120. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.). Sociological methodology: 290–312. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swann, W. B. 1983. Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self. In J. Suls & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.). Social psychological perspectives on the self: 33–66. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swann, W. B., & Read, S. J. 1981. Self-verification processes: How we sustain our self-conceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17(4): 351–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, T., & Sarsfield-Baldwin, L. 1990. The effects of self-esteem, task label, and performance feedback on goal setting, certainty, and attribution. Journal of Psychology, 125: 413–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. 1988. Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2): 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, R. M., Graziano, W. G., Vanman, E. J., & Tassinary, L. G. 2000. Personality, emotional experience, and efforts to control emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(4): 656–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnley, W. H., & Feldman, D. C. 1998. Psychological contract violations during corporate restructuring. Human Resource Management, 37(1): 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasta, R., & Brockner, J. 1979. Self-esteem and self-evaluation covert statement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47(6): 776–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. 2004. Understanding self-regulation. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation: 1–9. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, S. 2002. Rigor and relevance in Asian management research: Where are we and where can we go?. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2–3): 287–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. 1991. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17(3): 601–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., & Glibkowski, B. C. 2007. The impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60(3): 647–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhong, J. A., Lam, W., & Chen, Z. 2011. Relationship between leader–member exchange and organizational citizenship behaviors: Examining the moderating role of empowerment. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(3): 609–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, National Pingtung Institute of Commerce, PingTung, 900, Taiwan

    Chih-Ting Shih

  2. Department of Business Administration, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, 402, Taiwan

    Chih-Hsun Chuang

Authors
  1. Chih-Ting Shih
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chih-Hsun Chuang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chih-Ting Shih.

Additional information

The authors thank the APJM senior editor (Chi-Sum Wong) and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments. An earlier version of this article was presented as an interactive paper at the 2009 Academy of Management annual meeting, Chicago, Illinois, August 2009. This research was supported by Taiwan’s National Science Council Research Fund (NSC 95-2416-H-366-001).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shih, CT., Chuang, CH. Individual differences, psychological contract breach, and organizational citizenship behavior: A moderated mediation study. Asia Pac J Manag 30, 191–210 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-012-9294-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-012-9294-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation