MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024874547 · doi:10.1037/a0020858

Leader–member exchange and affective organizational commitment: The contribution of supervisor's organizational embodiment.

2010· article· en· W2024874547 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Eisenberger, Gökhan Karagonlar, Florence Stinglhamber, Pedro Neves, Thomas E. Becker, M. Gloria González‐Morales, Meta Steiger-Mueller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Psychology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersArmy Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
KeywordsSupervisorOrganizational commitmentPsychologyOrganizational identificationSocial psychologyPortugueseSocial exchange theoryAffective events theoryManagementJob performanceJob satisfaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to account for wide variation in the relationship between leader-member exchange and employees' affective organizational commitment, we propose a concept termed supervisor's organizational embodiment (SOE), which involves the extent to which employees identify their supervisor with the organization. With samples of 251 social service employees in the United States (Study 1) and 346 employees in multiple Portuguese organizations (Study 2), we found that as SOE increased, the association between leader-member exchange and affective organizational commitment became greater. This interaction carried through to in-role and extra-role performance. With regard to antecedents, we found in Study 1 that supervisor's self-reported identification with the organization increased supervisor's expression of positive statements about the organization, which in turn increased subordinates' SOE.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations643
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PsychologySame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207