- Email: [email protected]
Organizational attachment and health
Accepted Manuscript Organizational attachment and health
Thomas W.H. Ng, Tammy D. Allen PII: DOI: Reference:
S0001-8791(18)30026-5 doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2018.03.003 YJVBE 3159
To appear in:
Journal of Vocational Behavior
Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:
10 May 2017 5 March 2018 11 March 2018
Please cite this article as: Thomas W.H. Ng, Tammy D. Allen , Organizational attachment and health. The address for the corresponding author was captured as affiliation for all authors. Please check if appropriate. Yjvbe(2017), doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2018.03.003
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Organizational Attachment and Health
Thomas W. H. Ng (CONTACT AUTHOR) The University of Hong Kong Faculty of Business and Economics Pok Fu Lam
Tel: 852-3917-8344
US
Tammy D. Allen
CR
Email: [email protected]
IP
T
Hong Kong
The University of South Florida
AN
Department of Psychology
4202 East Fowler Avenue, PCD 4118G
M
Tempa, Florida 33620-7200
ED
Tel: (813) 974-0484
AC
CE
PT
Email: [email protected]
1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Organizational Attachment and Health
Abstract The current study examines whether psychological attachment to an organization is related to employee health. This is an important research question because, while employees’
T
psychological attachment benefits organizational productivity and lowers turnover, it is unclear
IP
whether and why such an attachment might benefit employees themselves.
Data collected from
CR
more than 400 studies (N = 230,983) in which nine types of organizational attachment and four
US
types of health outcomes were measured showed that, although different types of organizational attachment were highly correlated, they demonstrated some significantly different relationships
AN
with health outcomes. For example, psychological ownership and organization-based self-esteem
M
demonstrated the strongest relationships with employee health, whereas perceived insider status and organizational embeddedness demonstrated the weakest relationships.
In addition,
ED
variables that captured deep bonds (e.g., organization-based self-esteem) had stronger
PT
relationships with health than did those that captured weaker bonds (e.g., person-organization fit). Results underscore the need for more attention to the close relationship between
CE
organizational attachment and health in general, and the similarities and differences across
AC
various specific types of organizational attachment and health.
2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Key words: Attachment; health; meta-analysis. Many organizations strive to keep their employees attached (Park & Shaw, 2013; Rousseau, 1998). Having a psychologically attached workforce is important, as those employees are often more satisfied and productive than employees who are less attached (Hunter & Thatcher, 2007; Vandenberg & Lance, 1992).
Promoting employee health has also gained
IP
T
worldwide attention (Ganster & Rosen, 2013; Michel, O’Shea, & Hoppe, 2015), because when employees are mentally and physically healthy, organizational productivity is likely to be
CR
enhanced (Ford, Cerasoli, Higgins, & Decresare, 2011; Trumble & Pattath, 2013).
US
These two streams of research, organizational attachment (OA) and health, have developed independently. The goal of this study is to understand the theoretical foundation that
AN
underlies the OA-health relationship, test the strength of the overall relationship, and consider
three important contributions.
In doing so, we make
M
similarities and differences across various indicators of OA and health.
First, OA is a key job attitude that sustains motivation and
In turn, managers give greater support to those who are seen to have greater OA, as they
PT
2002).
ED
productivity (Harrison, Newman, & Roth, 2006; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolyntsky,
are viewed as loyal employees who merit more resources (Shore, Barksdale, & Shore, 1995;
CE
Shore, Bommer, & Shore, 2008; Yun, Takeuchi, & Liu, 2007). Although it is established that
AC
OA benefits the organization, whether and why OA benefits employees remains elusive. While many studies have included measures of OA and health, the OA-health relationship has been a by-product of studying other relationships rather than a focus. The OA-health relationship is important to examine because over-investment into work has often been associated with undermined health (e.g., Sonnentag & Fritz, 2015). If there is evidence that OA promotes health, it can provide a more balance and accurate view of the relationship between work and health. Second, many constructs have been examined as specific indicators of OA (Stamper & Masterson, 2002) and of health (Robbins, Ford, & Tetrick, 2012), and the overlap between some 3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT of these indicators (e.g., depression and burnout) has also been highlighted (Schonfled & Bianchi, 2016).
An integrated consideration of these constructs is needed because if they
overlap to a large extent, then treating them separately hinders research growth.
It is indeed not
uncommon that organizational constructs are similar (LePine, Erez, & Johnson, 2002; Morrow, 1983), which in turn impedes theory development, as new theories might be offered for slightly
Schmidt, Harter, & Lauver, 2010; Singh, 1991).
IP
T
different variables that could in fact be parsimoniously explained by a single framework (Le, Conversely, if the various indicators of OA
This study contributes to the literature by offering theoretical and
US
relationship is warranted.
CR
and of health are distinct, then a finer-grained approach to understanding the OA-health
empirical evidence on both the similarities and the differences across various OA and health
AN
indicators, thereby laying the necessary groundwork for integrating and differentiating subareas
M
of research.
Third, this study relies on attachment theory (Bowlby, 1988) to suggest that being
ED
attached to the organization can promote employee health. This premise represents an extension
PT
of attachment theory, which has largely focused on attachment in interpersonal relationships (e.g., parents and children, husband and wife, teachers and students). Because employees have a
CE
tendency to personify their employers (Ashman & Winstanley, 2007; Levinson, 1965), it is likely
too.
AC
that the benefits accrued from attachment to people are observable in an employment context, As individuals spend much of their time in their jobs (Dutton, Roberts, & Bednar, 2010),
the effects of their psychological attachment to the organizations are unlikely to be negligible. Construct Issues The Nature of OA OA is a stabilizing psychological force that ties an individual to an organization (Shapiro, Hom, Shen, & Agarwal, 2016). It represents a perception that one is closely linked or strongly bonded with the organization and that the organization is a core component in the individual’s 4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT sphere of life (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Morrow, 2011). Furthermore, it is an organizationtargeted attitude that serves an important functional purpose: It frames employees’ perceptions of their organizations in positive ways that provide employees with purpose and direction to their jobs.
When OA is strong, employees have legitimate reasons to see to it that their organizations
do well , which in turn enables them to find meaning in their work and the motivation to work
IP
T
hard on behalf of the organization (Meyer et al., 2004; Rosso, Dekas, & Wrzesniewski, 2010). This motivational argument is similar to that of Meyer and Herscovitch (2001), who suggest that,
CR
regardless of the form and reason, OA binds an individual to a course of action specified within
US
the terms of the employment relationship.
Below we consider nine types of OA. These constructs can be treated as indicators of OA
AN
because they share similarities that reflect the fundamental principles or components of
M
psychological attachments noted above, such as a strong sense of being tied to the target, the belief that the target is an important entity in one’s life, and giving meaning to one’s behavior
ED
(Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Pietomonaco, Uchino, & Schetter, 2013). These nine constructs
PT
all focus on employees’ feelings of being attached to the organization but not on organizational actions toward the employees, as felt attachment is constructed internally through making sense
CE
of one’s relationship with an external target. For this reason, we excluded constructs like
AC
perceived organizational support (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986). Organizational commitment. Affective organizational commitment (or organizational commitment hereafter) refers to a sense of belonging to an organization (Meyer, Allen, & Gellatly, 1990; Meyer et al., 2002) and is driven largely by positive emotional feelings about the organization (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986).
It represents a type of OA that broadly captures a
“want-to” stay mentality (Meyer, Becker, & Vandenberghe, 2004), believed to be the result of a high-quality exchange between the organization and the employee (Meyer et al., 2002). This positive, emotion-filled psychological force (Allen & Meyer, 1990) motivates employees to 5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT dedicate their energy and time to the employment relationship (Markvits, Ullrich, Van Dick, & Davis, 2008) and buffers negative workplace experiences (Rivkin, Diestel, & Schmidt, 2015). Organizational commitment remains the most commonly studied form of OA (Morrow, 2011). Organizational trust. Organizational trust is the degree to which employees are willing to become vulnerable to an organization’s behavior (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001; McAllister, 1995).
IP
T
Employees with strong organizational trust believe that the future conduct of the organization will be positive (Lewicki, McAllister, & Bies, 1998) and thus are willing to rely on it despite the
CR
risk that it might not follow through on its obligations (Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007; Mayer,
US
Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). Due to the risk involved and an acceptance of that risk, a high level of organizational trust motivates efforts that serve the organization’s interests (Williams,
AN
2001).
M
Organizational identification. Organizational identification is the extent to which employees see an organization as part of their identity (Ashforth, Harrison, & Gorley, 2008; Employees with strong organizational identification perceive the
ED
Ashforth & Mael, 1989).
Organizational identification thus represents a
PT
essence of an organization as self-defining.
deep-level psychological phenomenon and emerges through a continuous cognitive process of
CE
sense-making of positive events pertinent to the organization (Ashforth et al., 2008; Rousseau,
AC
1998).
Person-organization fit. Person-organization fit is the extent to which employees’ values are consistent with those of the organization (Cable & DeRue, 2002; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). Although such congruence itself is not a binding force, it provides the psychological basis to develop stronger attachment to the organization (Kim, Aryee, Loi, & Kim, 2013). For instance, when value congruence is high, employees’ needs are satisfied, which in turn enhances their positive attitudes toward the organization (Cable & Edwards, 2004). 6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Organizational embeddedness. Organizational embeddedness is the extent to which employees are enmeshed in their organization (Crossley, Bennett, Jex, & Burnfield, 2007).
It
consists of three components: fit with the organization, links to people and activities, and sacrifices if they leave (Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, & Erez, 2001).
Together, these
components keep employees tethered to the organization, especially when fit is strong, links are
T
Thus, organizational embeddedness overall represents a stable
IP
abundant, and sacrifice is high.
binding force that psychologically ties an employee to the organization.
CR
Organization-based self-esteem. Organization-based self-esteem is the extent to which
Gardner, Cummings, & Dunham, 1989).
US
people believe that they are capable, significant, and worthy organizational members (Pierce, It reflects the belief that “I count around here”; when
AN
it is high, employees develop a strong sense of competence working for the organization (Pierce
M
& Gardner, 2004). As individuals often have strong self-enhancement needs (Sedikides, 1993; Wells, 2001), such an employment relationship should be satisfying to them, thereby leading to
ED
the growth of a solid psychological bond (McAllister & Bigley, 2002; Pierce et al., 1989).
PT
Psychological ownership. Psychological ownership is the degree to which employees feel possessive of an organization (Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001). This type of OA involves the
CE
“It’s mine” belief. The explicit focus on possessiveness of the organization is the most
AC
distinguishing aspect of psychological ownership (Avey, Avolio, Crossley, & Luthans, 2008; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004), which creates a deep sense of bonding to the organizations. Perceived insider status. Perceived insider status is the extent to which employees see themselves as insiders within their organization (Stamper & Masterson, 2002).
It involves the
feeling that one has earned a personal space and acceptance inside the organization (Chen & Aryee, 2007). Perceived insider status might initially be just a membership perception, but can later become the basis of an employment relationship in which employees feel worthy of staying and of their contributions (Hui, Lee, & Wang, 2015; Wang & Kim, 2013). 7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Relational psychological contracts. Psychological contracts are employee expectations of their obligations and entitlements (Rousseau, 1989; 1995). Relational psychological contracts are said to exist when employees define and interpret their obligations broadly and are willing to further invest into the employment relationship (Conway & Briner, 2009; Lambert, Edwards, & Cable, 2003). Relational psychological contracts, thus, go beyond purely
IP
T
economic terms to include loyalty in exchange for long-term support and growth (Raja, Johns, & Ntalians, 2004).
CR
In brief, the nine aforementioned variables are all indicators of one’s OA.
Other
US
researchers have also viewed these variables as convergent, further justifying their conceptualization as representations of OA (Cable & DeRue, 2002; Cooper-Hakim &
AN
Viswesvaran, 2005; Han, Chiang, McConville, & Chiang, 2015; Knapp, Smith, & Sprinkle,
M
2014; Masterson & Stamper, 2003; Pierce et al., 2001; Stamper & Masterson, 2002). The Nature of Health Outcomes
ED
Health is one’s mental and physical well-being (Ford et al., 2011; Pascoe & Richman,
PT
2009). According to the World Health Organization, mental health is a psychological state in which a person realizes his or her own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can
CE
work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to her or his community.
AC
Put in a simpler way, it is a psychological state in which one functions satisfactorily. health, then, is the physical state of a person functioning satisfactorily.
Physical
In occupational health
psychology, two additional variables are used to represent employee health: low levels of job burnout and job strain.
These two variables are important indicators of employee health, as
there is robust evidence that high levels of these psychological variables severely hinder employees from functioning satisfactorily (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Sonnentag, Venz, & Casper, 2017). Job burnout is a response to chronic stress and comprises three specific dimensions (Lee 8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT & Ashforth, 1996; Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001). Emotional exhaustion is the degree to which one feels drained and void of energy. Depersonalization (or cynicism) is the extent to which a detached, cynical, and callous response to others and to objects is developed. Reduced sense of accomplishment (or loss of professional efficacy) is the degree to which one lacks a feeling of productivity and achievement and devalues his worth as a professional. Whereas job
IP
T
burnout captures one’s diminishing psychological capacity to perform her work role (Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004), job strain is not confined to specific dimensions and is often
CR
broadly defined as any negative affective and cognitive state that emerges in response to stressful
US
work (De Croon et al., 2004; Ford et al., 2014), such as feeling anxious, irritable, or frustrated. Mental health, physical health, low job burnout, and low job strain are likely to be
AN
positively correlated, and we thus treat all four of them as indicators of health.
First, the ways
M
stressors and other variables (e.g., OA) induce these health outcomes are likely to be similar (e.g., through resource depletion, through attachment benefits) (Baba, Jamal, & Tourigny, 1998;
ED
Pascoe, & Richman, 2009; Robbins et al., 2012). Second, it can be argued that work well-being Health is a product
PT
(low levels of job burnout, job strain) is a component of overall well-being.
of experiences in different life domains (Binder & Ward, 2013). Work constitutes a major
CE
sphere of life for most adults (Gini, 1998; Pryor & Davies, 1989). As Dutton et al. (2010) note,
AC
“work as a life domain is important for self-construction. Most people will spend large portions of their adult lives at work.” (p. 266). Thus, employees’ overall health can be partially reflected in people’s low level of job burnout and job strain, alongside mental and physical health. This broad perspective of health is widely adopted.
For instance, Xanthopoulou, Bakker, and Illies
(2012) note, “well-being [that is, health] may be used as a general ‘umbrella’ term that encompasses different constructs” (p. 1054). Grant, Christanson, and Price (2007) similarly call for a less restricted, more holistic view on the meaning of employee health. In addition, mental health and physical health are reciprocally linked. That is, a person 9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT with positive mental health has better bodily functioning and fewer health complaints (e.g., stomachache, headache, insomnia, fatigue, muscle pain), and vice versa (Hay, Marshall, Wang, & Sherbourne, 1994).
For instance, those who have depression report more physical health
complaints (Gates et al., in press), whereas those with poor physical health report less positive emotions and self-concepts (Folkins & Sime, 1981). Similarly, job burnout and strain might be
IP
T
inseparable in the long run; burnout is a chronic response to highly stressful jobs that create acute psychological strains (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991; Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004).
CR
Furthermore, health threats (job burnout, job strain) accumulate to build mental and physical
US
health problems, whereas generic mental and physical health problems hamper employees’ capacity to cope with job demands that cause job burnout and strain (Ganster & Rosen, 2013;
AN
Kahill, 1988).
M
Hypothesis Development The Theoretical Foundation of the Relationship between OA and Health
ED
To feel attached to a social target is a fundamental need of humans (Baumeister & Leary,
PT
1995). Attachment theory suggests that a close bond with an attachment figure has functional and protective effects on the individual (Bowlby, 1988). Feeling attached provides one
CE
psychological shelter, which one can use to shield away fear and hurtful feelings and to look for
2007).
AC
reassurance (Pietomonaco et al., 2013). Thus, attachment is therapeutic (Mikulincer & Shaver,
While attachment theory originally focused on attachment figures (e.g., parents) that are more powerful than the focal person (e.g., infants), subsequent research extends its application to include any figure that can provide resources (e.g., spouses, best friends) (Collins & Feeney, 2000; La Guardia, Ryan, Couchman, & Deci, 2000). As such, an organization, as a resource provider, can also be an attachment figure.
Indeed, Levinson (1965) notes that employees
might personify organizations, especially when the organization controls employees’ resources. 10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Being attached to an organization should relate to better health. Even though the underlying processes are largely psychological, and thus predominantly enhance mental health, they should have positive effects on one’s physical health, too, as the entire body functionality and immune system is enhanced in the presence of a secured attachment (Luyten, Van Houdenhove, Lemma, Target, & Fonagy, 2013).
Conversely, insecure attachment has been
based illnesses (Puig, Englund, Simpson, & Collins, 2013).
IP
T
linked to higher body-mass index (Hintsanen et al., 2010) and reporting more inflammation-
CR
First, Dykas and Cassidy (2011) suggest that those with secure attachment adopt a mental
US
model that draws on their positive attachment-related knowledge to process information in a positive way. Secured individuals are able to remember positive, trust-related events and tend
AN
to see and understand the world with a positive mindset that culminates in better health
M
(Mikulincer, 1998). Extending these cognitive benefits to an employment relationship, perhaps employees who feel securely and persistently attached to their organizations might hold more
ED
positive mental frames, such as being more upbeat and optimistic at work (Rom & Mikulincer,
PT
2003; Silverman, 1998; Simmons, Nelson, & Quick, 2003) Second, being attached promotes a more positive self-concept; people who feel securely
CE
attached to an attachment figure are more likely to see themselves as individuals of worth and
AC
develop a sense of mattering (RaqueBogdan, Ericson, Jackson, Martin, & Byran, 2011).
In
other words, secure attachment dispels negative beliefs about oneself, as one feels loved by others (Bowlby, 1988).
As positive self-concepts can buffer stress, anxiety, and depression,
employees who are attached securely and persistently to an organization might report fewer such problems. Third, another benefit of attachment is that it dispels negative beliefs about others; one anticipates the attachment figure to be supportive in stressful situations (Bowlby, 1988). Confidence in protection, thus, is the key reason why attachment enhances health (Dickstein, 11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1999; Meuwly, Bodenmann, Bardbury, Ditzen, & Heinrichs, 2012). Similarly, OA might promote health because employees anticipate enduring and long-term organization protection in times of need, alleviating their stress, burnout, and personal problems (Feeney, 2000). Fourth, Bowlby (1988) noted that individuals treat themselves as they were treated by their attachment figures, with a secured attachment leading to better self-treatment.
This self-
IP
T
respect mechanism might apply to the employment relationship too. When employees feel compassionately attached to an organization, they might become more compassionate about
CR
treating themselves positively, including maintaining good health (Neff & McGehee, 2010).
approval, esteem, and affiliation (Keller, 2008).
US
Finally, a secure attachment fulfills individuals’ socioemotional needs, or the need for For instance, when employees feel safely
AN
attached to the firm, they might feel approved by the firm as a recognized organizational
M
member, feel integrated with the firm of which they are proud, and feel protected by the firm. When socioemotional needs are consistently satisfied, individuals’ affective well-being is likely
ED
to be enhanced (Easterbrooks & Biringen, 2000; Ryan & Frederick, 1997), thereby promoting
PT
health.
Empirically, researchers observed that attachment to a partner was associated with greater
CE
mental health (Galinha, Oishi, Pereira, Wirtz, & Esteves, 2014) and greater physical health
AC
(Joplin, Nelson, & Quick, 1999). Even recalling the mental image of the attachment figure enables individuals to garner positive thoughts and dispel negative thoughts (Selcuk, Zayas, Gunaydin, Hazan, & Kross, 2012).
In contrast, insecure attachment is associated with more
negative emotions, poorer health, greater maladaptation, and more visits to doctors (Feeney & Ryan, 1994; McWilliams & Bailey, 2010) across infants, children, adolescents, and adults (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). In sum, on the basis of attachment theory, we predict that greater OA is linked to more positive employee health. Although organizations are not persons, it is the feelings of being 12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT attached to and belonging to an entity that generates the health benefits discussed above, such as positive self-evaluation, positive mental frames, positive perceptions of others, and satisfaction of socioemotional needs.
Those without OA might be deprived of these attachment benefits.
As noted by Baumeister and Leary (1995), “if belongingness is indeed a fundamental need, then, aversive reactions to a loss of belongingness should go beyond negative affect to include some
IP
T
types of pathology” (p. 500). Moreover, these attachment benefits are even more apparent over
organization becomes a long-term attachment figure.
US
H1: OA positively relates to employee health.
CR
time; as time progresses, employee bonding becomes stronger and more stable, and the
Fine-Grained Approaches
AN
The nine constructs of OA, though sharing similarities as discussed before, are For instance,
M
fundamentally distinctive. First, the bases of attachment are different.
organizational commitment captures a sense of belonging (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990) whereas
ED
person-organization fit captures value congruence (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Second, some
PT
OA constructs largely focus on the past and present experience with the firm; for instance, organizational embeddedness is based on fit, links, and sacrifice accumulated over the course of
CE
the employment relationship.
Other OA constructs focus on anticipated relationships with the
AC
firm; for instance, relational psychological contracts are based on promises and expectations that the organization will be developmental. Third, as explained below, some OA constructs capture a deep bond in which one’s self-concept is affected by the firm, whereas other OA constructs capture a psychological bond that does not involve incorporation of one’s selfconcept. More specifically, as OA benefits health largely through an attachment mechanism, those OA constructs that characterize a deeper psychological bond should demonstrate greater effects on health. That is, those that signify one’s extended self-concept into the relationship with the 13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT organization, including organizational identification, organization-based self-esteem, and psychological ownership should capture deep OA.
These three types of OA are based on
employees’ perceptions that the organization is well integrated with their lives, including their identity (captured by organizational identification; Ashforth et al., 2008; Lee, Park, & Koo, 2015), self-evaluation (captured by organization-based self-esteem; Pierce & Gardner, 2004),
T
In each of these three types
IP
and fate (captured by psychological ownership; Pierce et al., 2001).
of OA, much is at stake because the well-being of the organization determines the well-being of Pierce et al. (2001) similarly highlight that those with strong psychological
CR
the employees.
US
ownership see the organization as part of their identity and self-concept, suggesting that psychological ownership, organizational identification, and organization-based self-esteem all
AN
converge to capture a deep form of bonding that entails mental integration of the self and the
M
organization, thereby generating more attachment benefits. Conversely, several OA constructs capture a relatively weak form of bonding; those OA
ED
types that simply tie the individuals to the organizational membership but do not necessarily Among the nine OA
PT
create any deep-level integration might have weaker attachment benefits.
constructs, organizational embeddedness, person-organization fit, and perceived insider status
CE
characterize employees’ perceptions that they are somewhat linked to the organization, although
AC
the attachment force itself might not really affect their own self-concepts and mental processes. Organizational embeddedness, for example, can be predominantly driven by not wanting to sacrifice the accumulated stakes rather than a deeply held affective bond (Crossley et al., 2007). Similarly, person-organization fit might merely indicate value similarity between employees and the organization (Cable & DeRue, 2002), although that similarity does not necessarily lead to the development of a deep attachment. Perceived insider status represents a membership perception (Stamper & Masterson, 2002), but that membership might or might not resonate strongly with the employees. Thus, these three types of OA should generate weaker attachment 14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT benefits.
The above discussion leads us to expect that:
H2: Deep OA relates to health more strongly than does weak OA. The various health outcomes we examine (mental health, physical health, low job burnout, low job strain) are also fundamentally distinct.
Specifically, mental health and
physical health problems can be generated by different stressors (e.g., being undermined mainly
IP
T
creates mental health problems, while bad eating habits mainly creates physical health problems). Thus, treating them as interchangeable is not appropriate in some situations. Job
CR
burnout and job strain are also fundamentally distinctive. Job burnout is an accumulated
US
response to job stressors; employees are unlikely to experience this health threat (e.g., diminished sense of accomplishment) in a short period. On the contrary, job strain, such as In addition, job burnout captures an avoidance
AN
worries, can emerge in even just a few days.
M
orientation that an employee distances himself from further harm in his job role (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993), where job strain often involves negative activating psychological states such
ED
as anxiety, distress, and irritability (Spector, Chen, & O’Connell, 2000).
Finally, job burnout
PT
and strain might contribute to mental and physical health problems over time, but the two are distinct (Toker & Biron, 2012). As overall well-being reflects the well-being in various
CE
domains (e.g., work, marital relationships, family lives, personal hobbies, religions etc.; Binder
AC
& Ward, 2013; Hsieh, 2016), it can be argued that job burnout and strain is not the same as mental and physical health. The abovementioned differences among the four health outcomes lead us to expect significant differences in their strength of the relationship with OA constructs. First, low levels of job burnout and strain reflect well-being in the work domain (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991; Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004), whereas mental and physical health reflect one’s overall wellbeing (Ford et al., 2011).
A generally accepted tenet in organizational research is that one can
expect stronger relationships among phenomena that are at the same level of abstraction 15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT (Behson, 2002). As OA emerges from the work domain, it should accordingly have stronger effects on health outcomes that reflect one’s work well-being, including low levels of burnout and strain. H3: OA relates to work-specific health (i.e., low levels of job burnout and job strain) more strongly than to mental and physical health.
T
In addition, OA represents a psychological construct that should more strongly affect
IP
one’s psychological well-being than one’s physical well-being. Even if better psychological
As OA, low levels of burnout and strain and mental
US
OA’s effects are still likely to be indirect.
CR
well-being ultimately leads to better physical well-being (Gates et al., in press; Hay et al., 1994),
health all capture psychological forces whereas physical health does not, OA should have
AN
stronger effects on these health outcomes than on physical health. Thus, we expect that:
M
H4: The relationship between OA and physical health is weaker than is the relationship between OA and mental health aggregated with work-specific health (i.e., low level of
Method
PT
ED
job burnout and job strain).
Article Search
CE
We began our article search by using keywords in 11 business and psychology databases,
AC
including EBSCOHost, Emerald, Factiva, JSTOR, Oxford Journals, Proquest, PsycINFO, ScienceDirect, Sage Full-Text Collections, Wiley InterScience, and Digital Dissertation Consortium. To be thorough, we set the search period to cover articles published in the last 50 years (1967-2017). The first set of keywords was pertinent to OA. They include “organizational commitment,” “person-organization fit,” “organization-based self-esteem,” “organizational identification,” “organizational trust,” “job or organizational embeddedness,” “perceived insider status,” “psychological ownership,” “perceived organizational membership,” and “relational psychological contracts.” 16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The second set of keywords was health-related and included employees’ “mental wellbeing,” “physical well-being,” “depression,” “psychological distress,” “anxiety,” “illness/sickness/diseases,” “health complaints,” “health symptoms,” “body mass index,” “fatigue,” “burnout,” “emotional exhaustion,” “cynicism,” “depersonalization,” “professional accomplishment,” “negative mood,” “anger,” “hostility,” “job stress,” and “job strain.” In addition,
IP
T
The above keywords were used in each of the aforementioned 11 databases.
in each search, only one keyword was used. The searches identified more than 2,000 articles.
CR
We retained 398 articles that included abstracts that mentioned at least one OA variable and one
US
health variable, and the text provided correlation values. Adopting this exclusion rule increased the likelihood that the retained articles had relevant effect sizes.
AN
Several exclusion criteria were further applied. Six articles that did not operationalize
M
the variables in ways consistent with our study’s conceptualization of OA and health were excluded. Eight articles that measured job stressors, rather than reactions to those stressors,
ED
were excluded. Second, six experimental investigations were excluded, as the strength of effect Third, five articles
PT
sizes might be dependent upon the strength of researchers’ manipulation.
that used student samples were excluded, as these respondents were not actively participating in
CE
the labor market to fully experience the effects of OA on health. Fourth, as OA and health are
AC
both individual-level phenomena, two articles that examined the relationship at an aggregate level were excluded. Finally, as our focus is on OA, two articles that examined attachment to a profession or to a union were excluded. The above steps resulted in a total of 364 articles, which contained 401 studies (N = 230,983). There were 21 dissertations. Eleven percent (11%) were published before 2000, 37% between 2000 and 2010, and 52% in 2011 or after. Across studies that provided sample information, the average age was 38 (18-60 years old, SD = 9), 55% were women, 76% were Caucasians, 59% were married, 59% had children, and 65% had at least some college education. 17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The average job and organizational tenure was 8 and 9 years, respectively. The OA measures, health measures, and internal consistency estimates were coded by the first author. Following Finkelstein, Burke, and Raju (1995), two researchers blind to the purpose of the project were invited to independently code the studies. One researcher coded a random sample of 100 articles (about 25%), whereas the other coded the remaining articles.
IP
T
The coding provided by these two researchers was compared with the original coding conducted by the first author. Overall coding agreement was 95%. Discussion was undertaken to reach
CR
an agreement when there were discrepancies.
US
Measures
Organizational commitment involved measures of affective commitment.
Measures of organizational trust and
AN
and Smith’s (1993) scale was frequently used.
Meyer, Allen,
In cases in which researchers measured
M
identification used the organization as the target.
components of organizational trust, such as affective and cognitive trust, effect sizes were
ED
averaged. Robinson and Rousseau’s (1994) scale was commonly adopted. As managers
PT
represent the organization (Mayer & Gavin, 2005), trust in management was also treated as an indicator of organizational trust, following other researchers (e.g., Harvey, Kelloway & Duncan-
CE
Leiper, 2003). Thus, organizational trust in this study broadly captures employees’ trust in either Mael and Ashforth’s
AC
their organizations or managers who act on behalf of the organizations.
(1992) scale was frequently used to measure organizational identification. Person-organization fit was operationalized with two approaches. Under the objective approach, employees’ values and those of the organization were compared, with greater congruence indicating greater person-organization fit (Dylag, Jaworek, Karwowski, Kozusznik, & Marek, 2013; George & Chattopadhyay, 2005).
Under the subjective approach, employees
were asked to report the extent to which they felt they fit with their organization (Chen & Chiu, 2008), using Cable and DeRue’s (2002) or other scales. Although subjective fit is conceptually 18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT distinct from objective fit (Edwards et al., 2006), we combined them here based on Judge and Cable’s (1997) observation that subjective fit mediated the effects of objective fit on outcomes. In other words, these two types of fit tend to converge and overlap. Organizational embeddedness was operationalized with two approaches: objective and subjective. Under the objective approach, embeddedness was operationalized as the average of
IP
T
fit, links, and sacrifice, the three major components of this construct (Mitchell et al., 2001).
embedded in an organization (Crossley et al., 2007).
CR
Under the subjective approach, embeddedness was operationalized as a global feeling of being
US
Organization-based self-esteem was consistently measured by Pierce et al.’s (1989) scale. Both psychological ownership and perceived insider status were operationalized with established
Perceived insider status is frequently operationalized
M
Van Dyne and Pierce’s (2004) measures.
AN
scales as well. Examples of psychological ownership scales include Avey et al.’s (2008) and
with Stamper and Masterson’s (2002) scale.
ED
Relational psychological contracts were operationalized with two methods. First, some
PT
studies measure employees’ orientation toward sustaining a relational psychological contract with their employers, using Raja et al.’s (2004) or Shore, Tetrick, Lynch, and Barksdale’s (2006)
CE
scale. Second, some studies measure the extent that employees expect their firms to provide
AC
activities that promote long-term relationships with employees, such as training, development opportunities, and personal support (Jamil, Raja, & Darr, 2013; Jing, Xie, & Ning, 2014). Job burnout is typically operationalized by three core components (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Schaufeii, Leiter, Maslach, & Jackson, 1996), including emotional exhaustion, depersonalization or cynicism, and a sense of reduced personal accomplishment or professional efficacy.
Job strain broadly includes various measures of negative affective reactions to work,
such as job frustration, job anxiety, negative mood at work, or the absence of positive mood at work. These elements have been included in past studies of job strain (e.g., Beehr, Jex, Stacy, 19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT & Murray, 2000) and are consistent with Ford et al.’s (2014) premise that job strain encompasses all negative affective and cognitive states as a result of work. Mental health included mental health issues, such as anxiety (Johnson & Joshi, 2016), depression (Fletcher, 1991), and psychological distress (Barling, Bluen, & Fain, 1987). General mood (mood not limited to the work domain) has also been used as an indicator of mental health
T
Physical health was measured by asking respondents to identify
IP
(Ng & Feldman, 2014).
somatic symptoms experienced, such as headache, fatigue, pain, muscle strains, insomnia,
CR
stomachache, and high blood pressure (Schaubroeck & Fink, 1998; ten Brummelhuis, Ter
US
Hoeven, De Jong, & Peper, 2013). This variable was meant to be broad and included any physical or bodily health complaints (Lee, Ashford, & Bobko, 1990). Most studies measured
AN
groups of symptoms and combined them to represent overall physical health. Only a few studies
M
measured one specific type of physical health problem (e.g., muscle pain; Elst et al., 2014). Analytical Procedures
In the first step, the observed correlations were corrected for measurement error.
PT
technique.
ED
Correlations were corrected based on Raju, Burke, Normand, and Langlois’s (1991)
To that end, the observed correlation between a measure of OA and a measure of health was
CE
corrected using the internal reliability estimates reported in the primary studies.
To that end, the corrected
AC
step, the observed correlations were corrected for sampling error.
In the second
correlations between OA and health were aggregated across samples so that sample-size weighted mean effect sizes were obtained. We coded all health measures in a positive direction so that the analysis consistently indicates whether greater OA relates to more positive health.
In
addition, in cases in which more than one relevant effect size was provided in a single study (e.g., a study that reported both organizational commitment and identification or a study that reported both mental and physical health), an average effect size was created to represent that study before it was included in calculation of the overall relationship between OA and health. 20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT As a first step, we determined if aggregating across OA measures and across health measures was reasonable. Table 1 shows the meta-analytical correlations among OA measures. In order to obtain these inter-correlations, an additional 244 articles were gathered. We used keywords that represented the nine OA constructs (e.g., “organizational commitment,” “organizational identification,” and “organizational trust”) in electronic searches and used the
IP
T
same exclusion criteria as before (e.g., excluding experimental studies, excluding student samples) to identify suitable studies. However, for some of the cells in this matrix, empirical
This effect size is similar to effect sizes observed in
US
weighted average correlation was .65.
CR
studies were not available even after a thorough search. We observed that the sample-size
other meta-analyses that create higher-order constructs (Harrison et al., 2006; Judge & Bono,
AN
2001). At the same time, as the shared variance (42%) was less than half, it was prudent that
M
we also provided finer-grained results that separated different indicators of OA (e.g., deep vs. week OA).
ED
A similar analysis was performed on different measures of health (low job burnout, low
PT
job strain, mental health, and physical health). Table 2 shows the meta-analytical correlations among these four measures of health.
In order to derive these correlations, 155 additional
CE
articles were identified, with 61 being from the original pool used in the main analyses. These
AC
articles were identified through electronic keyword searches (e.g., “mental health,” “physical health,” “strain,” and “burnout”). We also used the same exclusion criteria as before to identify suitable studies (e.g., excluding experiments). We found that the sample-size weighted average correlation was .61.
Again, as the shared variance (37%) was less than half, it was prudent that
we also provided fine-grained results which treated different indicators of health as separate and meaningful aggregates (e.g., general health vs. work-specific health). Results Table 3 shows the meta-analyzed correlations.
In the Appendix, we provide the meta21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT analytical correlation between each of the OA constructs and each of the health outcomes, whenever we had at least two primaries studies addressing the same disaggregated relationships. H1 predicts OA positively relates to health. Across 401 samples (N = 230,983), OA was positively related to health at .38 (95% CI = .36, .40), suggesting that OA was a positive correlate of health. This effect size can be described as strong (Cohen, 1988). To lend further
Thus, it can be described as moderate in strength.
The effect size was .25 (95% CI = .16, .34). Several specific OA-health relationships
CR
(the time interval ranged from 3 weeks to 3 years).
IP
T
insight into this relationship, we identified 19 studies in which OA was measured prior to health
US
demonstrated strong effect sizes, including the relational contracts-mental health (.52), organizational commitment-low job burnout (.46), and organizational trust-low job burnout
AN
relationships (.41). These findings support H1.
M
H2 predicts that deep OA (i.e., organizational identification, organization-based selfesteem, and psychological ownership) relates to health more strongly than does weak OA (i.e.,
ED
person-organization fit, organizational embeddedness, and perceived insider status). The
PT
comparison tests were conducted with the approach adopted by others who performed effect size comparisons in meta-analyses (Steel & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2002; Wright & Bonett, 2002).
In
CE
this procedure, the moderator in question (e.g., deep vs. weak OA type) was used as an
AC
independent variable to predict, in a weighted least squares multiple regression, the corrected correlations.
If the moderator was a significant predictor, then it indicates significant between-
group differences driven by the moderator. As shown in Table 3, the average of deep OA (organizational identification, organizationbased self-esteem, psychological ownership) was related to health at .36 (95% CI = .31, .41), and was significantly stronger (p < .05) than the effect size associated with the average of weak OA (person-organization fit, organizational embeddedness, perceived insider status) on health (.26, 95% CI = .21, .31). Post-hoc analyses showed that it was largely the difference in mental 22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT health that drove this difference; deep OA, on average, was related to mental health (.41) more strongly than was weak OA (.25). Strong and weak OA did not differ in their effects on low job burnout and low job strain.
Overall, H2 received support.
H3 predicts that OA relates to low job burnout and job strain as an aggregate more strongly than to mental and physical health as an aggregate. As shown in Table 3, the effect of
IP
T
OA on the average of low job burnout and low job strain (.41, 95% CI = .40, .42) was significantly stronger (p < .01) than the effect of OA on the average of mental and physical
CR
health (.35, 95% CI = .33, .37). Post-hoc analyses showed that the difference was driven by
US
organizational embeddedness, OBSE, organizational commitment, and organizational trust. That is, these variables have significantly stronger effects on work-related health (.30, .53, .43,
AN
and .41, respectively) than on general health (.06, .32, .36, and .26, respectively).
M
supported.
H3 was thus
H4 predicts that OA relates to physical health more weakly than to mental health, low job
ED
burnout, and low job strain as an aggregate. As shown in Table 3, OA was related to physical
PT
health (.30, 95% CI = .26, .34), and the magnitude of this effect size was significantly weaker (p < .01) than the effect of OA on the average of mental health, low job burnout, and low job strain Post-hoc analyses revealed that the difference was driven by
CE
(.39, 95% CI = .37, .41).
AC
organizational embeddedness, OBSE, organizational commitment, and organizational trust. These variables have significantly weaker effects (p < .05) on physical health (-.06, .27, .32, and .23, respectively) than on the combination of mental health, low job burnout, and low job strain (.24, .47, .40, and .32, respectively). These results support H4. Discussion Implications for Theory Development Researchers have studied different types of OA (e.g., Masterson & Stamper, 2003; Meyer et al., 2002; Riketta, 2005), as employees with stronger OA are often more productive and loyal. 23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The benefits of promoting OA, thus, are evident from an organization’s standpoint. From an individual’s standpoint, though, it is unclear why one should develop strong OA, especially when job mobility has become the norm rather than the exception over the last few decades (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Briscoe, Henagan, Burton, & Murphy, 2012). We contribute to the literature by demonstrating that OA is associated with health
T
Being attached to an attachment figure has been shown to be
IP
benefits for individuals.
therapeutic (Lopez & Brennan, 2000); we extend that premise to the workplace arena and show
CR
that, regardless of the specific form, OA was generally related to better employee health,
US
including greater mental and physical well-being and lower job burnout and strain. This finding also contributes to occupational health psychology by showing that the work
AN
domain can significantly promote the health of an individual. This is important, as existing
M
approaches that examine the effects of work on health typically focus on how overinvestment in the work domain undermines one’s health (Ganster & Rosen, 2013; Ganster & Schaubroeck,
ED
1991). Extending that perspective, this study suggests that being attached to an organization is
PT
not detrimental to one’s health. Guided by attachment theory, this study indeed argues that OA provides many attachment benefits, thereby generating positive effects on employee health.
CE
In addition, this study contributes to the literature by integrating two domains that have First, there are at
AC
been extensively examined using different, but closely related, constructs.
least nine different types of OA. We provided both theoretical reasons and empirical evidence as to why they are positively correlated but distinctive. While all nine OA types motivate individuals to stay at the organization and work hard, some OA types represent a deeper form of attachment, such as those that assimilate one’s self-concept with the organization’s entity, whereas others represent weaker types of attachment, such as those that merely tie individuals to the relationship through membership. Despite these differences, our meta-analytical results still showed that different types of 24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT OA were quite strongly correlated (averaged correlation = .65), suggesting that it is important for future research to either further distinguish the different OA constructs by comparing their strength of association with other important correlates (like we did here) or provide some integration of the overlapping literature. For instance, the notion of person-organization fit is
IP
on the latter can be legitimately built on the research on the former.
T
already incorporated in the construct of organizational embeddedness, and therefore the research
At the same time, we have also presented empirical evidence that deeper OA had
CR
generally stronger relationships with health than did weaker OA. Similarly, in the health
indicators examined are inter-related but distinct.
US
domain, we have provided both theoretical reasons and empirical evidence that the four For instance, we have shown that OA tended
AN
to have weaker effects on physical health than on mental health, as OA represents a
M
psychological, rather than physiological, experience. Researchers are therefore encouraged to provide strong theoretical rationales for their choice of OA or health or both, as we have
ED
demonstrated that there are subtle differences between them, manifested in different strengths of
PT
association with their correlates.
Implications for Future Research
CE
The abovementioned findings show to researchers who examined OA that they should
AC
consider health as one of the possible study outcomes, in addition to the typical consequences of OA, like job performance and turnover. As individuals who are healthier tend to perform better (Ford et al., 2011), future theories that address OA and job performance should consider the incorporation of health variables as a possible mediating or feedback mechanism. Second, researchers should probe the differences between different types of OA, and this study has laid the groundwork for that avenue.
We have provided theoretical reasons and
empirical evidence for why the various indicators of OA converge and diverge. Some more specific comparisons can be conducted in future research, such as the different attachment 25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT benefits generated by deep OA (e.g., organization-based self-esteem, psychological ownership) and weak OA (e.g., person-organization fit, organizational embeddedness). There are three OA constructs that we did not categorize into either deep or weak bonds, including organizational commitment and trust and relational psychological contract. They do not involve integration of self-concepts with the organization, but they are not merely
IP
T
perceptions of membership. Commitment captures a sense of belonging whereas trust and relational psychological contracts are based on positive expectation of future conduct and
CR
promises. Their relationship with heath was between .30 and .39. Future research should
strengthened.
US
identify under what conditions the effects of these three types of OA on health can be For instance, the effects on negative health might be accentuated when the
AN
expectation or promise that is central to trust and relational psychological contract is unmet. The
M
fact that psychological contract breach has robust negative effects on employees’ affective wellbeing (Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski, & Bravo, 2007) lends credit to such conjecture.
ED
In addition, some of the effect sizes were small.
For example, organizational
PT
identification as a specific OA type deserves more attention, as it did not have an especially strong relationship with health. As shown in Table 3, its relationship with health (.31) was the
CE
same as that of person-organization fit (.31), although we have argued that identification
AC
represented a deeper form of OA than does person-organization fit. One possible explanation is that, in order to integrate one’s identity with that of the organization, one must establish some sort of similarity with the organization, which was captured by person-organization fit. Without this basis, the resulted identity might be fragile. Moreover, future research into job strain as a specific indicator of health is also needed. For instance, the relationships of low job burnout and low job strain with OA were markedly different (.45 vs. .32, p < .05). On the contrary, we observed that OA’s relationship with physical health (.30) was not different from that of low job strain (.32), despite the argument that 26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT OA should affect job strain more strongly, as they are both psychological in nature. These results suggest that the extent to which low job strain overlaps with mental and physical health was perhaps underestimated in the existing research. One possibility is that job strain, as an immediate response to acute job stressors, evokes intense emotional and physiological reactions that become mental and physical health issues over time.
In addition, we observed that only
IP
T
four studies focused on one specific physical health symptom (e.g., Elst et al., 2004). It is possible that the OA-health relationship is weaker when a specific health complaint, rather than
CR
overall physical health, is measured; for instance, we found that, across the four empirical studies
US
that measured a specific health complaint, the relationship with OA was only .03. Another possible research avenue is to incorporate the positive OA-health relationship
AN
into workaholism research. Workaholism has been shown to relate to negative health outcomes
M
(Clark, Michel, Zhdanova, Pui, & Baltes, 2016). Our findings, however, indicate that OA is associated with positive health. The key to understanding these different findings is that
ED
workaholism implies an over-investment in work tasks (Ng, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2007), and
PT
this investment does not necessarily reflect stronger feelings of being tied to the organization. OA research, on the other hand, focuses more on the positive sense of attachment to an
CE
organization and how it affects employees. Thus, perhaps if researchers focus on the group of
AC
workaholics who also feel attached to their organizations (in addition to just to their work), they are more likely to identify the positive outcomes of workaholism. Finally, future research should also consider operationalizing the attachment benefits we have outlined in this study, as it is important to first understand why being attached to an organization is psychologically and physiologically beneficial and then use that theoretical basis to identify mediating mechanisms.
In so doing, the different attachment benefits generated by
various types of OA can be identified, which in turn facilitates researchers to compare findings for the OA-outcome relationship across various types of OA. 27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Several limitations deserve more empirical research as well.
First, most of the empirical
studies included here adopted cross-sectional designs, and future studies should consider using more longitudinal designs.
We did identify a subset of time-lagged studies that measured OA
prior to health, and the result showed that OA was associated with greater subsequent health. Future research should design different longitudinal studies to extend this observation.
Because OA represented employees’
IP
research should consider using non-self-report measures.
T
Second, all of the study variables were self-reported in the original studies; future
CR
subjective feelings of attachments to their own organizations, the use of self-report OA was
US
inevitable. Although objective (physiological) measures of health are desirable, we were not able to identify any OA studies that reported such measures, suggesting a research gap. Third
AN
and finally, as our focus was on clarifying the theoretical and empirical nature of the OA-health
M
relationship, we did not examine moderators. However, some groups or cultures might experience the OA-health relationship more strongly, especially those that value attachment and
PT
differences.
Future research should therefore explore cross-cultural
ED
belonging, like collectivists.
Implications for Managerial Practice
CE
This study suggests to managers that employees who feel attached to their organization not
AC
only are likely to be more productive and loyal, but they are also likely to be healthier. Thus, there are strong reasons to continue to promote employee attachment, as that attachment is likely to benefit both the individual and the organization. We have argued that OA enhances one’s well-being largely because it provides many attachment benefits, such as a sense of security and belonging, self-worth, confidence in protection, and satisfaction of socioemotional needs. Although we have shown to managers that different types of OA have parallel positive effects on health, we have also alerted them to the subtle differences across the nine OA types. These OA types have different substantive bases, with some more likely to affect health strongly 28
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT whereas others more likely to affect health only mildly. Managers, therefore, are strongly advised to understand the psychological bases of their employees’ OA; for instance, if OA is only based on the fact that the employee has been a core member of the organization, perhaps managers should endeavor to cultivate deeper bonds that link employees’ self-concepts to the organization.
2000; Morrow, 2011).
IP
T
We also hope to draw managers’ attention to employees with weak OA (Beck & Wilson, In addition to being a turnover risk, these employees are vulnerable to Their poor health might not
CR
health problems because of the deprivation of attachment benefits.
tasks are interdependent.
US
only affect their own productivity, but also interfere with their coworkers’ productivity if their Thus, it is vital that managers identify employees that have weak OA
AN
so that corresponding actions addressing the abovementioned management problems (e.g.,
M
turnover, declining productivity) can be planned. Conclusion
ED
OA has been a pillar of vocational behavior research; many studies in this area have
PT
investigated how to promote employees’ attachment to their organizations, which in turn should lower organizational turnover and strengthen organizational productivity.
We adopt a different
CE
perspective and focus on why and how OA might benefit employees themselves in terms of
AC
promoting their health. Data gathered from multiple studies showed that OA had a non-trivial positive relationship with employee health and that the relationship varied across different types of OA and different health outcomes. We hope that these results draw researchers’ attention to the fact that OA may be an important precursor of one’s good health and that there are both similarities and differences across the existing indicators of OA and health.
29
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT References Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). principle.
The boundaryless career as a new employment
In M. B. Arthur & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career (pp. 3-
20). New York: Oxford University Press.
T
Ashforth, B. E. & Mael, F. A. (1989). Social identity theory and the organisation. Academy of
IP
Management Review, 14, 20-39.
CR
Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Gorley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34, 325-374. Ashman, I., & Winstanley, D. (2007). For or against corporate identity? Personalification and the
US
problem of moral agency. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 83-95. Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Crossley, C. R., & Luthans, F. (2008). Psychological ownership:
AN
Theoretical extensions and analysis of a multi-dimensional theory-based measure. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 1-19.
M
Avey, J. B., Wu, K., & Holley, E. (2015). The influence of abusive supervision and job emebddedness on citizenship and deviance. Journal of Business Ethics, 129, 721-731.
ED
Baba, V. V., Jamal, M., & Tourigny, L. (1998). Work and mental health: A decade in Canadian research. Canadian Psychology, 39, 94-107.
PT
Barling, J., Bluen, S. D., & Fain, R. (1987). Psychological functioning following an acute disaster. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 683-690.
CE
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529. Beck, K., & Wilson, C. (2000). Development of affective organizational commitment: A cross-
AC
sequential examination of change with tenure. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 114136.
Beehr, T. A., Jex, S. M., Stacy, B. A., & Murray, M. A. (2000). Work stressors and coworker support as predictors of individual strain and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 391-405. Behson, S. J. (2002). Which dominates? The relative importance of work-family organizational support and general organizational context on employee outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 53–72. Binder, M., & Ward, F. (2013). The structure of subjective well-being: A vector autoregressive approach. Metroeconomica, 64, 361-400. 30
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. New York: Basic Books. Briscoe, J. P., Henagan, S. C., Burton, J. P., & Murphy, W. M. (2012). Coping with an insecure employment environment: The differing roles of protean and boundaryless career orientations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 308-316. Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 875-884. Cable, D. M., & Edwards, J. R. (2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and
T
empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 822-834.
IP
Chen, C., & Chiu, S. (2008). An integrative model linking supervisor support and organizational
CR
citizenship behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 23, 1-10. Chen, Z. X., & Aryee, S. (2007). Delegation and employee work outcomes: An examination of the cultural context of mediating processes in China. Academy of Management Journal,
US
50, 226-238.
Clark, M. A., Michel, J. S., Zhdanova, L., Pui, S. Y., & Baltes, B. B. (2016). All work and no
AN
play? A meta-analytic examination of the correlates and outcomes of workaholism. Journal of Management, 42, 1836-1873.
M
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
ED
Collins, N. L., & Feeney, B. C. (2000). A safe haven: An attachment theory perspective on support seeking and caregiving in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and
PT
Social Psychology, 78, 1053-1073.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity:
CE
A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 909-927. Conway, N., & Briner, R. B. (2002). A daily diary study of affective responses to psychological 302.
AC
contract breach and exceeded promises. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 287Cooper-Hakim, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The construct of work commitment: Testing an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 241-259. Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and an integration of research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18, 621-656. Crossley, C. D., Bennett, R. J., Jex, S. M., & Burnfield, J. L. (2007). Development of a global measure of job embeddedness and integration into a traditional model of voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1031-1042. De Croon, E. M., Sluiter, J. K., Blonk, R. W. B., Broersen, J. J., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. W. 31
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT (2004). Stressful work, psychological job strain, and turnover: A 2-year propective cohort study of truck drivers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 442-454. Dickstein, S. (1999). Confidence in protection: A developmental psychopathology perspective. Journal of Family Psychology, 13, 484-487. Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytical findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628. Dutton, J. E., Roberts, L. M., & Bednar, J. (2010). Pathways for positive identity construction at
T
work: Four types of positive identity and the building of social resources. Academy of
IP
Management Review, 35, 265–293
CR
Dykas, M. J., & Cassidy, J. (2011). Attachment and the processing of social information across the life span: Theory and evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 19-46. Dylag, A., Jaworek, M., Karwowski, W., Kozusznik, M., & Marek, T. (2013). Discrepancy
US
between individual and organizational values: Occupational burnout and work engagement among white-collar workers. International Journal of Industrial
AN
Ergonomics, 43, 225-231.
M
Easterbrooks, M. A., & Biringen, Z. (2000). Mapping the terrain of emotional availability and attachment. Attachment and Human Development, 2, 123-129.
ED
Edwards, J. R., Cable, D. M., Williamson, I. O., Lambert, L. S., & Shipp, A. J. (2006). The phenomenology of fit: Linking the person and environment to the subjective experience
PT
of person-environment fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 802-827. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived
CE
organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507. Elst, T. V., Richter, A., Sverke, M., Naswall, K., De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2014). Threat of losing valued job features: The role of perceived control in mediating the effect of
AC
qualitative job insecurity on job strain and psychological withdrawal. Work and Stress, 28, 143-164.
Feeney, J. A. (2000).
Implications of attachments style for patterns of health and illness. Child:
Care, Health and Development, 26, 277-288. Feeney, J. A., & Ryan, S. M. (1994). Attachment style and affect regulation: Relationships with health behavior and family experiences of illness in a student sample. Health Psychology, 13, 334-345. Finkelstein, L. M., Burke, M. J., & Raju, N. S. 1995. Age discrimination in simulated employment contexts: An integrative analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 652663. 32
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Fletcher, C. (1991). Candidates’ reactions to assessment centres and their outcomes: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64, 117-127. Folkins, C. H., & Sime, W. E. (1981). Physical fitness training and mental health. American Psychologist, 36, 373-389. Ford, M. T., Cerasoli, C. P., Higgins, J. A., & Decresare, A. L. (2011). Relationships between psychological, physical, and behavioral health and work performance: A review and meta-analysis. Work and Stress, 25, 185-204.
T
Ford, M. T., Matthews, R. A., Woolbridge, J. D., Mishra, V., Kakar, U. M. et al. (2014). How do
IP
occupational stressor-strain effects vary with time? A review and meta-analysis of the
CR
relevance of time lags in longitudinal studies. Work and Stress, 28, 9-30. Galinha, I. G., Oishi, S., Pereira, C. R., Wirtz, D., & Esteves, F. (2014). Adult attachment, love styles, relationship experiences, and subjective well-being: Cross-cultural and gender
US
comparison between Americans, Portuguese, and Mozambicans. Social Indicators Research, 119, 823-852.
AN
Ganster, D. C. (2008). Measurement challenges for studying work-related stressors and strains. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 259-270.
M
Ganster, D. C., & Rosen, C. C. (2013). Work stress and employee health: A multidisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 39, 1085-1122.
ED
Ganster, D. C., & Schaubroeck, J. (1991). Work, stress and employee health. Journal of Management, 17, 235-271.
PT
Gates, K., Petterson, S., Wingrove, P., Miller, B., & Klink, K. (in press). You can’t treat what you don’t diagnose: An analysis of the recognition of somatic presentations of depression
CE
and anxiety in prime time. Families, Systems, and Health. George, E., & Chattopadhyay, P. (2005). One foot in each camp: The dual identification of contract workers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 68-99.
AC
Gini, A. (1998). Work, identity and self: How we are formed by the work we do. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 707–714. Grant, A. M., Christanson, M. K., & Price, R. H. (2007). Happiness, health, or relationships? Managerial practices and employee well-being tradeoffs. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21, 51-63. Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of Management, 30, 859-879. Han, T., Chiang, H., McConville, D., & Chiang, C. (2015). A longitudinal investigation of person-organization fit, person-job fit, and contextual performance: The mediating role of psychological ownership. Human Performance, 28, 425-439. 33
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L. (2006). How important are job attitudes? Metaanalytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 305-325. Harvey, S., Kelloway, E. K., & Duncan-Leiper, L. (2003). Trust in management as a buffer of the relationships between overload and strain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 306-315. Hay, R. D., Marshall, G. N., Wang, E. Y. I., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1994). Four-year cross-lagged
IP
of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 62, 441-449.
T
associations between physical and mental health in the medical outcomes study. Journal
CR
Hazan, C., & Shaver, R. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270-280.
Hintsanen, M., Jokela, M., Pulkki-Raback, L., Viikari, J., & Keltikanga-Jarvinen, L. (2010).
US
Associations of youth and adulthood body-mass index and waist-hip ratio with attachment styles and dimensions. Current Psychology, 29, 257-271.
AN
Hsieh, C. (2016). Domain importance in subjective well-being measures. Social Indicators Research, 127, 777-792.
M
Hui, C., Lee, C., & Wang, H. (2015). Organizational inducements and employee citizenship Behavior: The mediating role of perceived insider status and the moderating role of
ED
collectivism. Human Resource Management, 54, 439-456. Hunter, L. W., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2007). Feeling the heat: Effects of stress, commitment, and
PT
job experience on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 953-968. Jamil, A., Raja, U., & Darr, W. (2013). Psychological contract types as moderator in the beach-
CE
violation and violation-burnout relationships. The Journal of Psychology, 147, 491-515. Jing, R., Xie, J. L., & Ning, J. (2014). Commitment to organizational change in a Chinese context. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29, 1098-1114.
AC
Johnson, T. D., & Joshi, A. (2016). Dark clouds or silver linings? A stigma threat perspective on the implications of an autism diagnosis for workplace well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 430-449. Joplin, J. R., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (1999). Attachment behavior and health: Relationships at work and home. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 783-796. Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80-92. Judge, T. A., & Cable, D. M. (1997). Applicant personality, organizational culture, and organizational attraction. Personnel Psychology, 50, 359-394. 34
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Kahill, S. (1988). Symptoms of professional burnout: A review of empirical evidence. Canadian Psychology, 29, 284-297. Keller, H. (2008). Attachment – past and present. But what about the future? Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42, 406-415. Kim, T., Aryee, S., Loi, R., & Kim, S. (2013). Person-organization fit and employee outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24, 3719-3737.
T
Knapp, J. R., Smith, B. R., & Sprinkle, T. A. (2014). Clarifying the relational ties of
IP
organizational belonging: Understanding the roles of perceived insider status,
CR
psychological ownership, and organizational identification. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 21, 273-285.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of
US
individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, persongroup, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281-342.
AN
La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need
M
fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 367-384. Lambert, L. S., Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. M. (2003). Breach and fulfillment of the
ED
psychological contract: A comparison of traditional and expanded views. Personnel Psychology, 56, 895-934.
PT
Le, H., Schmidt, F. L., Harter, J. K., & Lauver, K. J. (2010). The problem of empirical redundancy of constructs in organizational research: An empirical investigation.
CE
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112, 112-115. Leck, J. D., & Saunders, D. M. (1992). Hirschman’s loyalty: Attitude or behavior? Employee Responsibilties and Rights Journal, 5, 219-230.
AC
Lee, C., Ashford, S. J., & Bobko, P. (1990). Interactive effects of Type A behavior and perceived control on worker performance, job satisfaction, and somatic complaints. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 870-881. Lee, E., Park, T., & Koo, B. (2015). Identifying organizational identification as a basis for attitudes and behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 1049-1080. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123-133. LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 52-65. 35
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between men and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 370-390. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23, 438-458. Lopez, F. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). Dynamic processes underlying adult attachment organization: Toward an attachment theoretical perspective on the healthy and effective self. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 283-300.
T
Luyten, P., Van Houdenhove, B., Lemma, A., Target, M., & Fonagy, P. (2013). Vulnerability for
IP
functional somatic disorders: A contemporary psychodynamic approach. Journal of
CR
Psychotherapy Integration, 23, 250-262.
Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
US
13, 103-123.
Markvits, Y., Ullrich, J., Van Dick, R., & Davis, A. J. (2008). Regulatory foci and organizational
AN
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 485-489. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
M
Psychology, 52, 397-422.
Masterson, S. S., & Stamper, C. L. (2003). Perceived organizational membership: An aggregate
ED
frameworks suggesting the employee-organization relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 473-490.
PT
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.
CE
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734. Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the
AC
shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874888.
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 24-59. McAllister, D. J., & Bigley, G. A. (2002). Work context and the definition of self: How organizational care influences organization-based self-esteem. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 894-904. McWilliams, L. A., & Bailey, S. J. (2010). Associations between adult attachment ratings and health conditions: Evidence from the National Comorbidity Survey replication. Health Psychology, 29, 446-453. 36
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Meuwly, N., Bodenmann, G., Bardbury, T. N., Ditzen, B., & Heinrichs, M. (2012). Dyadic coping, insecure attachment, and cortisol stress recovery following experimentally induced stress. Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 937-947. Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Gellatly, I. R. (1990). Affective and continuance commitment to the organization: Evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 710-720. Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and
T
occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal
IP
of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.
CR
Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis and integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 9911007.
US
Meyer, J. P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 299-326.
AN
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolyntsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents,
M
correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20-52. Michel, A., O’Shea, D., & Hoppe, A. (2015). Designing and evaluating resource-oriented
ED
interventions to enhance employee well-being and health. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88, 459-463.
PT
Mikulincer, M. (1998). Attachment working models and the sense of trust: An exploration of interaction goals and affect regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,
CE
1209-1224.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
AC
Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M. (2001). Why people stay: Using organizational embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1102-1121. Morrow, P. C. (1983). Concept redundancy in organizational research: The case of work commitment. Academy of Management Review, 8, 486-500. Morrow, P. C. (2011). Managing organizational commitment: Insights from longitudinal research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79, 18-35. Neff, K. D., & McGehee, P. (2010). Self-compassion and psychological resilience among adolescents and young adults. Self and Identity, 9, 225-240. Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2014). Embeddedness and well-being in the United States and 37
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Singapore: The mediating effects of work-to-family and family-to-work conflict. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19, 360-375. Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2007). Dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of workaholism: A conceptual integration and extension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 111-136. O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification and internalization on prosocial
T
behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.
IP
Park, T., & Shaw, J. D. (2013). Turnover rates and organizational performance: A meta-analysis.
CR
Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 268-309.
Pascoe, E. A., & Richman, L. S. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531-554.
US
Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational context: A review of the organization-based self-esteem literature. Journal of Management, 30,
AN
591-622.
Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1989). Organization-based
M
self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 622-648.
ED
Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26, 298-310.
PT
Pietomonaco, P. R., Uchino, B., & Schetter, C. D. (2013). Close relationship processes and health: Implications of attachment theory for health and disease. Health Psychology, 32,
CE
499-513.
Pryor, R. G., & Davies, R. (1989). A comparison of conceptualizations of work centrality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 283-289.
AC
Puig, J., Englund, M. M., Simpson, J. A., & Collins, W. A. (2013). Predicting adult physical illness from infant attachment: A prospective longitudinal study. Health Psychology, 32, 409-417.
Raja, U., Johns, G., & Ntalians, F. (2004). The impact of personality on psychological contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 350-367. Raju, N. S., Burke, M. J., Normand, J., & Langlois, G. M. (1991). A new meta-analytic approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 432-446. RaqueBogdan, T. L., Ericson, S. K., Jackson, J., Martin, H. M., & Byran, N. A. (2011). Attachment and mental and physical health: Self-compassion and mattering as mediators. 38
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 272-278. Riketta, M. (2005). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 358-384. Rivkin, W., Diestel, S., & Schmidt, K. H. (2015). Affective commitment as a moderator of the adverse relationships between day-specific self-control demands and psychological wellbeing. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88, 185-194. Robbins, J. M., Ford, M. T., & Tetrick, L. E. (2012). Perceived unfairness and employee health:
T
A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 235-272.
IP
Robinson, S. L., & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: Not the
CR
exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 245-259. Rom, E., & Mikulincer, M. (2003). Attachment theory and group processes: The association between attachment styles and group-related representations, goals, memories, and
US
functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1220-1235. Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A
AN
theoretical
integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91-127.
M
Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 121-139.
ED
Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
PT
Rousseau, D. M. (1998). Why workers still identify with organizations. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 19, 217-233.
CE
Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529-565.
AC
Schaubroeck, J., & Fink, L. (1998). Facilitating and inhibiting effects of job control and social support on stress outcomes and role behavior: A contingency model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 167-195. Schaufeii, W. B., Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C, & Jackson, S. E. (1996). MBI-General Survey. In C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Maslach Bumout Inventory manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Pyschologists Press. Schonfled, I. S., & Bianchi, R. (2016). Burnout and depression: Two entities or one? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 72, 22-37. Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32, 344-354. 39
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Sedikides, C. (1993). Assessment, enhancement, and verification determinants of the selfevaluation process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 317-338. Selcuk, E., Zayas, V., Gunaydin, G., Hazan, C., & Kross, E. (2012). Mental representations of attachment figures facilitate recovery following upsetting autobiographical memory recall. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 362-378. Shapiro, D. L., Hom, P., Shen, W., & Agarwal, R. (2016). How do leader departures affects
T
subordinates’ organizational attachment? A 360-degree relational perspective. Academy
IP
of Management Review, 41, 479-502.
CR
Shore, L. M., Barksdale, K., & Shore, T. H. (1995). Managerial perceptions of employee commitment to the organization. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1593-1615. Shore, T. H., Bommer, W. H., & Shore, L. M. (2008). An integrative model of managerial
US
perceptions of employee commitment: Antecedents and influences on employee treatment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 635-655.
AN
Shore, L. M., Tetrick, L. E., Lynch, P., & Barksdale, K. (2006). Social and economic exchange: Construct development and validation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 837-
M
867.
Silverman, D. K. (1998). The tie that binds: Affect regulation, attachment, and psychoanalysis.
ED
Psychoanalytic Psychology, 15, 187-212. Simmons, B. L., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (2003). Health for the hopeful: A study of
PT
attachment behavior in home health care nurses. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 361-375.
CE
Singh, J. (1991). Redundancy in constructs: Problem, assessment, and an illustrative example. Journal of Business Research, 22, 255-280.
AC
Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2015). Recovery from job stress: The stressor-detachment model as an integrative framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, S72-S103. Sonnentag, S., Venz, L., & Casper, A. (2017). Advances in recovery research: What have we learned? What should be done next? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22, 365-380. Spector, P. E., Chen, P. Y., & O’Connell, B. J. (2000). A longitudinal study of relations between job stressors and job strains while controlling for prior negative affectivity and strains. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 211-218. Stamper, C. L., & Masterson, S. S. (2002). Insider or outsider? How employee perceptions of insider status affect their work behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 87540
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 894. Steel, P. D., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2002). Comparing meta-analytic moderator estimation techniques under realistic conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 96-111. Ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Ter Hoeven, C. L., De Jong, M. O. T., & Peper, B. (2013). Exploring the linkage between the home domain and absence from work: Health, motivation, or both? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 273-290.
T
Toker, S., & Biron, M. (2012). Job burnout and depression: Unraveling their temporal
IP
relationship and considering the role of physical activity. Journal of Applied Psychology,
CR
97, 699-710.
Trumble, R., & Pattath, P. (2013). Rising healthcare costs – challenges and options for businesses. Journal of Compensation and Benefits, 29, 19-27.
US
Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior.
AN
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 439-459.
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (1992). Examining the causal order of job satisfaction and
M
organizational commitment. Journal of Management, 18, 153-167. Wang, J., & Kim, T. (2013). Proactive socialization behavior in China: The mediating role of
ED
perceived insider status and the moderating role of supervisors’ traditionality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 389-406.
PT
Wells, L. E. (2001). Self-esteem and social inequality. In T. J. Owens, Stryker, S., & N. Goodman (Eds.), Extending self-esteem theory and research: Sociological and
CE
psychological currents (pp. 301-329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Widmer, P. S., Semmer, N. K., Kalin, W., Jacobshagen, N., & Meier, L. L. (2012). The ambivalence of challenge stressors: Time pressure associated with both negative and
AC
positive well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 422-433. Williams, M. (2001). In whom we trust: Group membership as an affective context for trust development.
Academy of Management Review, 26, 377-396.
Wright, T. A., & Bonett, D. G. (2002). The moderating effects of employee tenure on the relationship between organizational commitment and job performance: A metaanalysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1183-1190. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., & Illies, R. (2012). Everyday working life: Explaining withinperson fluctuations in employee well-being. Human Relations, 65, 1051-1069. Yun, S., Takeuchi, R., & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity 41
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 745-756. Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., & Bravo, J. (2007). The impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60,
AC
CE
PT
ED
M
AN
US
CR
IP
T
647-680.
42
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 1. Meta-Analytical Correlations among Specific Measures of Organizational Attachment. 8
1. OC
-------
2. OT
.57
2
(53,
3
4
5
6
7
PT
1
-------
.57
(34,
(12,
20341)
4393)
.76
.72
.53
(31,
(1,
(2,
41655)
338)
588)
5.
.53
.52
.42
.72
OBSE
(30,
(1,
(2,
(1,
-------
9778)
186)
1089)
6.
.64
.81
POF
(33,
(1,
13890)
335)
.63
.28
RPC
NU
-------
D
-------
PT E
242)
.50
.75
.52
(6,
(1,
(1,
1612)
643)
199)
.51
.62
.52
.53
CE
7.
AC
4. OE
SC
.74
MA
RI
37403)
3. OI
-------
(20,
(3,
(4,
(4,
(1,
(1,
6803)
530)
1168)
2150)
84)
314)
8.
.65
N/A
.64
N/A
.64
N/A
POW
(14,
(1,
(5,
4049)
347)
3672)
9. PIS
.57
N/A
9
.62
N/A
.65
-------
N/A -------
N/A
.46
.65
(2,
(1,
(2,
(1,
(1,
316)
347)
354)
289)
347)
N-------
weighted ρ =
.65 43
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC
CE
PT E
D
MA
NU
SC
RI
PT
Note. The first figure in parentheses represents the number of studies cumulated (k). The second figure represents the total sample size (N). OC = organizational commitment; OT = organizational trust; OI = organizational identification; OE = organizational embeddedness; OBSE = organization-based self-esteem; POF = person-organization fit; RPC = relational psychological contracts; POW = psychological ownership; PIS = perceived insider status; N/A = unavailable; ρ = corrected correlation.
44
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2. Meta-Analytical Correlations among Specific Measures of Health. 1
2. Low job strain
.49 (19, 5348)
.54 .60 (46, 27065) (14, 3070)
-------
.65 .49 (40, 38995) (10, 2182)
.63 (75, 92788) -------
N-weighted ρ = .61
NU
4. Physical health
5
-------
SC
3. Mental health
4
PT
-------
3
RI
1. Low job burnout
2
AC
CE
PT E
D
MA
Note. The first figure in parentheses represents the number of studies cumulated (k). The second figure represents the total sample size (N); ρ = corrected correlation.
45
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 3. The Relationships of Organizational Attachment and Health. N
95% CI
90% CV
rc
SD
230,983
401
.38
.17
.36/.40
.10/.66
200,151
322
.39
.17
.37/.41
.11/.67
Organizational trust – health
11,915
23
.31
.10
.27/.35
.15/.47
Organizational identification – health
11,692
27
.31
.18
.24/.38
.01/.61
Person-organization fit – health
6,171
18
.31
.16
.24/.38
.05/.57
Organizational embeddedness – health
6,422
12
.23
.16
.14/.32
-.03/.49
Organization-based self-esteem – health
5,470
15
.42
.19
.32/.52
.11/.73
Psychological ownership – health
1,521
3
.47
.09
.37/.57
.32/.62
781
3
.20
.13
.05/.35
-.01/.41
1,474
6
.30
.26
.09/.51
-.13/.73
18,683
46
.36
.19
.31/.41
.05/.67
13,374
33
.26
.16
.21/.31
.00/.52
115,799
143
.37
.07
.36/.38
.25/.49
OA - physical health
47,796
47
.30
.13
.26/.34
.09/.51
OA - low job burnout
76,161
166
.45
.19
.42/.48
.14/.76
OA - low job strain
34,333
92
.32
.20
.28/.36
-.01/.65
OA - mental and physical health
163,595
190
.35
.15
.33/.37
.10/.60
OA - low job burnout and strain
110,494
258
.41
.12
.40/.42
.21/.61
OA - mental health, low job burnout and
226,293
401
.39
.18
.37/.41
.09/.69
Deep OA (organizational identification,
self-esteem, and psychological ownership) - health
MA
organization-based
NU
Perceived insider status – health Relational psychological contract – health
RI
Organizational commitment – health
SC
Overall relationship
PT
k
Weak OA (organizational embeddedness,
D
person-
PT E
organization fit, and perceived insider status) - health
AC
CE
OA - mental health
strain
Note. N = cumulative sample size; k = number of studies cumulated; rc = sample-size weighted corrected correlation; SD = standard deviation of rc; CI = confidence intervals for rc; CV = credibility intervals for rc; OA = organizational attachment.
46
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlights
This study examined the effects of organizational attachment on
PT
health. Meta-analyses were used to examine the overall relationship.
Psychological attachment was positively (.38) related to health
SC
RI
across 401 studies.
Some types of attachment affected health outcomes more strongly.
The results suggest that feeling attached contributes to greater
AC
CE
PT E
D
employee health.
MA
NU
47
Thomas W.H. Ng, Tammy D. Allen PII: DOI: Reference:
S0001-8791(18)30026-5 doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2018.03.003 YJVBE 3159
To appear in:
Journal of Vocational Behavior
Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:
10 May 2017 5 March 2018 11 March 2018
Please cite this article as: Thomas W.H. Ng, Tammy D. Allen , Organizational attachment and health. The address for the corresponding author was captured as affiliation for all authors. Please check if appropriate. Yjvbe(2017), doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2018.03.003
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Organizational Attachment and Health
Thomas W. H. Ng (CONTACT AUTHOR) The University of Hong Kong Faculty of Business and Economics Pok Fu Lam
Tel: 852-3917-8344
US
Tammy D. Allen
CR
Email: [email protected]
IP
T
Hong Kong
The University of South Florida
AN
Department of Psychology
4202 East Fowler Avenue, PCD 4118G
M
Tempa, Florida 33620-7200
ED
Tel: (813) 974-0484
AC
CE
PT
Email: [email protected]
1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Organizational Attachment and Health
Abstract The current study examines whether psychological attachment to an organization is related to employee health. This is an important research question because, while employees’
T
psychological attachment benefits organizational productivity and lowers turnover, it is unclear
IP
whether and why such an attachment might benefit employees themselves.
Data collected from
CR
more than 400 studies (N = 230,983) in which nine types of organizational attachment and four
US
types of health outcomes were measured showed that, although different types of organizational attachment were highly correlated, they demonstrated some significantly different relationships
AN
with health outcomes. For example, psychological ownership and organization-based self-esteem
M
demonstrated the strongest relationships with employee health, whereas perceived insider status and organizational embeddedness demonstrated the weakest relationships.
In addition,
ED
variables that captured deep bonds (e.g., organization-based self-esteem) had stronger
PT
relationships with health than did those that captured weaker bonds (e.g., person-organization fit). Results underscore the need for more attention to the close relationship between
CE
organizational attachment and health in general, and the similarities and differences across
AC
various specific types of organizational attachment and health.
2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Key words: Attachment; health; meta-analysis. Many organizations strive to keep their employees attached (Park & Shaw, 2013; Rousseau, 1998). Having a psychologically attached workforce is important, as those employees are often more satisfied and productive than employees who are less attached (Hunter & Thatcher, 2007; Vandenberg & Lance, 1992).
Promoting employee health has also gained
IP
T
worldwide attention (Ganster & Rosen, 2013; Michel, O’Shea, & Hoppe, 2015), because when employees are mentally and physically healthy, organizational productivity is likely to be
CR
enhanced (Ford, Cerasoli, Higgins, & Decresare, 2011; Trumble & Pattath, 2013).
US
These two streams of research, organizational attachment (OA) and health, have developed independently. The goal of this study is to understand the theoretical foundation that
AN
underlies the OA-health relationship, test the strength of the overall relationship, and consider
three important contributions.
In doing so, we make
M
similarities and differences across various indicators of OA and health.
First, OA is a key job attitude that sustains motivation and
In turn, managers give greater support to those who are seen to have greater OA, as they
PT
2002).
ED
productivity (Harrison, Newman, & Roth, 2006; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolyntsky,
are viewed as loyal employees who merit more resources (Shore, Barksdale, & Shore, 1995;
CE
Shore, Bommer, & Shore, 2008; Yun, Takeuchi, & Liu, 2007). Although it is established that
AC
OA benefits the organization, whether and why OA benefits employees remains elusive. While many studies have included measures of OA and health, the OA-health relationship has been a by-product of studying other relationships rather than a focus. The OA-health relationship is important to examine because over-investment into work has often been associated with undermined health (e.g., Sonnentag & Fritz, 2015). If there is evidence that OA promotes health, it can provide a more balance and accurate view of the relationship between work and health. Second, many constructs have been examined as specific indicators of OA (Stamper & Masterson, 2002) and of health (Robbins, Ford, & Tetrick, 2012), and the overlap between some 3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT of these indicators (e.g., depression and burnout) has also been highlighted (Schonfled & Bianchi, 2016).
An integrated consideration of these constructs is needed because if they
overlap to a large extent, then treating them separately hinders research growth.
It is indeed not
uncommon that organizational constructs are similar (LePine, Erez, & Johnson, 2002; Morrow, 1983), which in turn impedes theory development, as new theories might be offered for slightly
Schmidt, Harter, & Lauver, 2010; Singh, 1991).
IP
T
different variables that could in fact be parsimoniously explained by a single framework (Le, Conversely, if the various indicators of OA
This study contributes to the literature by offering theoretical and
US
relationship is warranted.
CR
and of health are distinct, then a finer-grained approach to understanding the OA-health
empirical evidence on both the similarities and the differences across various OA and health
AN
indicators, thereby laying the necessary groundwork for integrating and differentiating subareas
M
of research.
Third, this study relies on attachment theory (Bowlby, 1988) to suggest that being
ED
attached to the organization can promote employee health. This premise represents an extension
PT
of attachment theory, which has largely focused on attachment in interpersonal relationships (e.g., parents and children, husband and wife, teachers and students). Because employees have a
CE
tendency to personify their employers (Ashman & Winstanley, 2007; Levinson, 1965), it is likely
too.
AC
that the benefits accrued from attachment to people are observable in an employment context, As individuals spend much of their time in their jobs (Dutton, Roberts, & Bednar, 2010),
the effects of their psychological attachment to the organizations are unlikely to be negligible. Construct Issues The Nature of OA OA is a stabilizing psychological force that ties an individual to an organization (Shapiro, Hom, Shen, & Agarwal, 2016). It represents a perception that one is closely linked or strongly bonded with the organization and that the organization is a core component in the individual’s 4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT sphere of life (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Morrow, 2011). Furthermore, it is an organizationtargeted attitude that serves an important functional purpose: It frames employees’ perceptions of their organizations in positive ways that provide employees with purpose and direction to their jobs.
When OA is strong, employees have legitimate reasons to see to it that their organizations
do well , which in turn enables them to find meaning in their work and the motivation to work
IP
T
hard on behalf of the organization (Meyer et al., 2004; Rosso, Dekas, & Wrzesniewski, 2010). This motivational argument is similar to that of Meyer and Herscovitch (2001), who suggest that,
CR
regardless of the form and reason, OA binds an individual to a course of action specified within
US
the terms of the employment relationship.
Below we consider nine types of OA. These constructs can be treated as indicators of OA
AN
because they share similarities that reflect the fundamental principles or components of
M
psychological attachments noted above, such as a strong sense of being tied to the target, the belief that the target is an important entity in one’s life, and giving meaning to one’s behavior
ED
(Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Pietomonaco, Uchino, & Schetter, 2013). These nine constructs
PT
all focus on employees’ feelings of being attached to the organization but not on organizational actions toward the employees, as felt attachment is constructed internally through making sense
CE
of one’s relationship with an external target. For this reason, we excluded constructs like
AC
perceived organizational support (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986). Organizational commitment. Affective organizational commitment (or organizational commitment hereafter) refers to a sense of belonging to an organization (Meyer, Allen, & Gellatly, 1990; Meyer et al., 2002) and is driven largely by positive emotional feelings about the organization (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986).
It represents a type of OA that broadly captures a
“want-to” stay mentality (Meyer, Becker, & Vandenberghe, 2004), believed to be the result of a high-quality exchange between the organization and the employee (Meyer et al., 2002). This positive, emotion-filled psychological force (Allen & Meyer, 1990) motivates employees to 5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT dedicate their energy and time to the employment relationship (Markvits, Ullrich, Van Dick, & Davis, 2008) and buffers negative workplace experiences (Rivkin, Diestel, & Schmidt, 2015). Organizational commitment remains the most commonly studied form of OA (Morrow, 2011). Organizational trust. Organizational trust is the degree to which employees are willing to become vulnerable to an organization’s behavior (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001; McAllister, 1995).
IP
T
Employees with strong organizational trust believe that the future conduct of the organization will be positive (Lewicki, McAllister, & Bies, 1998) and thus are willing to rely on it despite the
CR
risk that it might not follow through on its obligations (Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007; Mayer,
US
Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). Due to the risk involved and an acceptance of that risk, a high level of organizational trust motivates efforts that serve the organization’s interests (Williams,
AN
2001).
M
Organizational identification. Organizational identification is the extent to which employees see an organization as part of their identity (Ashforth, Harrison, & Gorley, 2008; Employees with strong organizational identification perceive the
ED
Ashforth & Mael, 1989).
Organizational identification thus represents a
PT
essence of an organization as self-defining.
deep-level psychological phenomenon and emerges through a continuous cognitive process of
CE
sense-making of positive events pertinent to the organization (Ashforth et al., 2008; Rousseau,
AC
1998).
Person-organization fit. Person-organization fit is the extent to which employees’ values are consistent with those of the organization (Cable & DeRue, 2002; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). Although such congruence itself is not a binding force, it provides the psychological basis to develop stronger attachment to the organization (Kim, Aryee, Loi, & Kim, 2013). For instance, when value congruence is high, employees’ needs are satisfied, which in turn enhances their positive attitudes toward the organization (Cable & Edwards, 2004). 6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Organizational embeddedness. Organizational embeddedness is the extent to which employees are enmeshed in their organization (Crossley, Bennett, Jex, & Burnfield, 2007).
It
consists of three components: fit with the organization, links to people and activities, and sacrifices if they leave (Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, & Erez, 2001).
Together, these
components keep employees tethered to the organization, especially when fit is strong, links are
T
Thus, organizational embeddedness overall represents a stable
IP
abundant, and sacrifice is high.
binding force that psychologically ties an employee to the organization.
CR
Organization-based self-esteem. Organization-based self-esteem is the extent to which
Gardner, Cummings, & Dunham, 1989).
US
people believe that they are capable, significant, and worthy organizational members (Pierce, It reflects the belief that “I count around here”; when
AN
it is high, employees develop a strong sense of competence working for the organization (Pierce
M
& Gardner, 2004). As individuals often have strong self-enhancement needs (Sedikides, 1993; Wells, 2001), such an employment relationship should be satisfying to them, thereby leading to
ED
the growth of a solid psychological bond (McAllister & Bigley, 2002; Pierce et al., 1989).
PT
Psychological ownership. Psychological ownership is the degree to which employees feel possessive of an organization (Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001). This type of OA involves the
CE
“It’s mine” belief. The explicit focus on possessiveness of the organization is the most
AC
distinguishing aspect of psychological ownership (Avey, Avolio, Crossley, & Luthans, 2008; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004), which creates a deep sense of bonding to the organizations. Perceived insider status. Perceived insider status is the extent to which employees see themselves as insiders within their organization (Stamper & Masterson, 2002).
It involves the
feeling that one has earned a personal space and acceptance inside the organization (Chen & Aryee, 2007). Perceived insider status might initially be just a membership perception, but can later become the basis of an employment relationship in which employees feel worthy of staying and of their contributions (Hui, Lee, & Wang, 2015; Wang & Kim, 2013). 7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Relational psychological contracts. Psychological contracts are employee expectations of their obligations and entitlements (Rousseau, 1989; 1995). Relational psychological contracts are said to exist when employees define and interpret their obligations broadly and are willing to further invest into the employment relationship (Conway & Briner, 2009; Lambert, Edwards, & Cable, 2003). Relational psychological contracts, thus, go beyond purely
IP
T
economic terms to include loyalty in exchange for long-term support and growth (Raja, Johns, & Ntalians, 2004).
CR
In brief, the nine aforementioned variables are all indicators of one’s OA.
Other
US
researchers have also viewed these variables as convergent, further justifying their conceptualization as representations of OA (Cable & DeRue, 2002; Cooper-Hakim &
AN
Viswesvaran, 2005; Han, Chiang, McConville, & Chiang, 2015; Knapp, Smith, & Sprinkle,
M
2014; Masterson & Stamper, 2003; Pierce et al., 2001; Stamper & Masterson, 2002). The Nature of Health Outcomes
ED
Health is one’s mental and physical well-being (Ford et al., 2011; Pascoe & Richman,
PT
2009). According to the World Health Organization, mental health is a psychological state in which a person realizes his or her own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can
CE
work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to her or his community.
AC
Put in a simpler way, it is a psychological state in which one functions satisfactorily. health, then, is the physical state of a person functioning satisfactorily.
Physical
In occupational health
psychology, two additional variables are used to represent employee health: low levels of job burnout and job strain.
These two variables are important indicators of employee health, as
there is robust evidence that high levels of these psychological variables severely hinder employees from functioning satisfactorily (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Sonnentag, Venz, & Casper, 2017). Job burnout is a response to chronic stress and comprises three specific dimensions (Lee 8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT & Ashforth, 1996; Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001). Emotional exhaustion is the degree to which one feels drained and void of energy. Depersonalization (or cynicism) is the extent to which a detached, cynical, and callous response to others and to objects is developed. Reduced sense of accomplishment (or loss of professional efficacy) is the degree to which one lacks a feeling of productivity and achievement and devalues his worth as a professional. Whereas job
IP
T
burnout captures one’s diminishing psychological capacity to perform her work role (Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004), job strain is not confined to specific dimensions and is often
CR
broadly defined as any negative affective and cognitive state that emerges in response to stressful
US
work (De Croon et al., 2004; Ford et al., 2014), such as feeling anxious, irritable, or frustrated. Mental health, physical health, low job burnout, and low job strain are likely to be
AN
positively correlated, and we thus treat all four of them as indicators of health.
First, the ways
M
stressors and other variables (e.g., OA) induce these health outcomes are likely to be similar (e.g., through resource depletion, through attachment benefits) (Baba, Jamal, & Tourigny, 1998;
ED
Pascoe, & Richman, 2009; Robbins et al., 2012). Second, it can be argued that work well-being Health is a product
PT
(low levels of job burnout, job strain) is a component of overall well-being.
of experiences in different life domains (Binder & Ward, 2013). Work constitutes a major
CE
sphere of life for most adults (Gini, 1998; Pryor & Davies, 1989). As Dutton et al. (2010) note,
AC
“work as a life domain is important for self-construction. Most people will spend large portions of their adult lives at work.” (p. 266). Thus, employees’ overall health can be partially reflected in people’s low level of job burnout and job strain, alongside mental and physical health. This broad perspective of health is widely adopted.
For instance, Xanthopoulou, Bakker, and Illies
(2012) note, “well-being [that is, health] may be used as a general ‘umbrella’ term that encompasses different constructs” (p. 1054). Grant, Christanson, and Price (2007) similarly call for a less restricted, more holistic view on the meaning of employee health. In addition, mental health and physical health are reciprocally linked. That is, a person 9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT with positive mental health has better bodily functioning and fewer health complaints (e.g., stomachache, headache, insomnia, fatigue, muscle pain), and vice versa (Hay, Marshall, Wang, & Sherbourne, 1994).
For instance, those who have depression report more physical health
complaints (Gates et al., in press), whereas those with poor physical health report less positive emotions and self-concepts (Folkins & Sime, 1981). Similarly, job burnout and strain might be
IP
T
inseparable in the long run; burnout is a chronic response to highly stressful jobs that create acute psychological strains (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991; Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004).
CR
Furthermore, health threats (job burnout, job strain) accumulate to build mental and physical
US
health problems, whereas generic mental and physical health problems hamper employees’ capacity to cope with job demands that cause job burnout and strain (Ganster & Rosen, 2013;
AN
Kahill, 1988).
M
Hypothesis Development The Theoretical Foundation of the Relationship between OA and Health
ED
To feel attached to a social target is a fundamental need of humans (Baumeister & Leary,
PT
1995). Attachment theory suggests that a close bond with an attachment figure has functional and protective effects on the individual (Bowlby, 1988). Feeling attached provides one
CE
psychological shelter, which one can use to shield away fear and hurtful feelings and to look for
2007).
AC
reassurance (Pietomonaco et al., 2013). Thus, attachment is therapeutic (Mikulincer & Shaver,
While attachment theory originally focused on attachment figures (e.g., parents) that are more powerful than the focal person (e.g., infants), subsequent research extends its application to include any figure that can provide resources (e.g., spouses, best friends) (Collins & Feeney, 2000; La Guardia, Ryan, Couchman, & Deci, 2000). As such, an organization, as a resource provider, can also be an attachment figure.
Indeed, Levinson (1965) notes that employees
might personify organizations, especially when the organization controls employees’ resources. 10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Being attached to an organization should relate to better health. Even though the underlying processes are largely psychological, and thus predominantly enhance mental health, they should have positive effects on one’s physical health, too, as the entire body functionality and immune system is enhanced in the presence of a secured attachment (Luyten, Van Houdenhove, Lemma, Target, & Fonagy, 2013).
Conversely, insecure attachment has been
based illnesses (Puig, Englund, Simpson, & Collins, 2013).
IP
T
linked to higher body-mass index (Hintsanen et al., 2010) and reporting more inflammation-
CR
First, Dykas and Cassidy (2011) suggest that those with secure attachment adopt a mental
US
model that draws on their positive attachment-related knowledge to process information in a positive way. Secured individuals are able to remember positive, trust-related events and tend
AN
to see and understand the world with a positive mindset that culminates in better health
M
(Mikulincer, 1998). Extending these cognitive benefits to an employment relationship, perhaps employees who feel securely and persistently attached to their organizations might hold more
ED
positive mental frames, such as being more upbeat and optimistic at work (Rom & Mikulincer,
PT
2003; Silverman, 1998; Simmons, Nelson, & Quick, 2003) Second, being attached promotes a more positive self-concept; people who feel securely
CE
attached to an attachment figure are more likely to see themselves as individuals of worth and
AC
develop a sense of mattering (RaqueBogdan, Ericson, Jackson, Martin, & Byran, 2011).
In
other words, secure attachment dispels negative beliefs about oneself, as one feels loved by others (Bowlby, 1988).
As positive self-concepts can buffer stress, anxiety, and depression,
employees who are attached securely and persistently to an organization might report fewer such problems. Third, another benefit of attachment is that it dispels negative beliefs about others; one anticipates the attachment figure to be supportive in stressful situations (Bowlby, 1988). Confidence in protection, thus, is the key reason why attachment enhances health (Dickstein, 11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1999; Meuwly, Bodenmann, Bardbury, Ditzen, & Heinrichs, 2012). Similarly, OA might promote health because employees anticipate enduring and long-term organization protection in times of need, alleviating their stress, burnout, and personal problems (Feeney, 2000). Fourth, Bowlby (1988) noted that individuals treat themselves as they were treated by their attachment figures, with a secured attachment leading to better self-treatment.
This self-
IP
T
respect mechanism might apply to the employment relationship too. When employees feel compassionately attached to an organization, they might become more compassionate about
CR
treating themselves positively, including maintaining good health (Neff & McGehee, 2010).
approval, esteem, and affiliation (Keller, 2008).
US
Finally, a secure attachment fulfills individuals’ socioemotional needs, or the need for For instance, when employees feel safely
AN
attached to the firm, they might feel approved by the firm as a recognized organizational
M
member, feel integrated with the firm of which they are proud, and feel protected by the firm. When socioemotional needs are consistently satisfied, individuals’ affective well-being is likely
ED
to be enhanced (Easterbrooks & Biringen, 2000; Ryan & Frederick, 1997), thereby promoting
PT
health.
Empirically, researchers observed that attachment to a partner was associated with greater
CE
mental health (Galinha, Oishi, Pereira, Wirtz, & Esteves, 2014) and greater physical health
AC
(Joplin, Nelson, & Quick, 1999). Even recalling the mental image of the attachment figure enables individuals to garner positive thoughts and dispel negative thoughts (Selcuk, Zayas, Gunaydin, Hazan, & Kross, 2012).
In contrast, insecure attachment is associated with more
negative emotions, poorer health, greater maladaptation, and more visits to doctors (Feeney & Ryan, 1994; McWilliams & Bailey, 2010) across infants, children, adolescents, and adults (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). In sum, on the basis of attachment theory, we predict that greater OA is linked to more positive employee health. Although organizations are not persons, it is the feelings of being 12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT attached to and belonging to an entity that generates the health benefits discussed above, such as positive self-evaluation, positive mental frames, positive perceptions of others, and satisfaction of socioemotional needs.
Those without OA might be deprived of these attachment benefits.
As noted by Baumeister and Leary (1995), “if belongingness is indeed a fundamental need, then, aversive reactions to a loss of belongingness should go beyond negative affect to include some
IP
T
types of pathology” (p. 500). Moreover, these attachment benefits are even more apparent over
organization becomes a long-term attachment figure.
US
H1: OA positively relates to employee health.
CR
time; as time progresses, employee bonding becomes stronger and more stable, and the
Fine-Grained Approaches
AN
The nine constructs of OA, though sharing similarities as discussed before, are For instance,
M
fundamentally distinctive. First, the bases of attachment are different.
organizational commitment captures a sense of belonging (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990) whereas
ED
person-organization fit captures value congruence (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Second, some
PT
OA constructs largely focus on the past and present experience with the firm; for instance, organizational embeddedness is based on fit, links, and sacrifice accumulated over the course of
CE
the employment relationship.
Other OA constructs focus on anticipated relationships with the
AC
firm; for instance, relational psychological contracts are based on promises and expectations that the organization will be developmental. Third, as explained below, some OA constructs capture a deep bond in which one’s self-concept is affected by the firm, whereas other OA constructs capture a psychological bond that does not involve incorporation of one’s selfconcept. More specifically, as OA benefits health largely through an attachment mechanism, those OA constructs that characterize a deeper psychological bond should demonstrate greater effects on health. That is, those that signify one’s extended self-concept into the relationship with the 13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT organization, including organizational identification, organization-based self-esteem, and psychological ownership should capture deep OA.
These three types of OA are based on
employees’ perceptions that the organization is well integrated with their lives, including their identity (captured by organizational identification; Ashforth et al., 2008; Lee, Park, & Koo, 2015), self-evaluation (captured by organization-based self-esteem; Pierce & Gardner, 2004),
T
In each of these three types
IP
and fate (captured by psychological ownership; Pierce et al., 2001).
of OA, much is at stake because the well-being of the organization determines the well-being of Pierce et al. (2001) similarly highlight that those with strong psychological
CR
the employees.
US
ownership see the organization as part of their identity and self-concept, suggesting that psychological ownership, organizational identification, and organization-based self-esteem all
AN
converge to capture a deep form of bonding that entails mental integration of the self and the
M
organization, thereby generating more attachment benefits. Conversely, several OA constructs capture a relatively weak form of bonding; those OA
ED
types that simply tie the individuals to the organizational membership but do not necessarily Among the nine OA
PT
create any deep-level integration might have weaker attachment benefits.
constructs, organizational embeddedness, person-organization fit, and perceived insider status
CE
characterize employees’ perceptions that they are somewhat linked to the organization, although
AC
the attachment force itself might not really affect their own self-concepts and mental processes. Organizational embeddedness, for example, can be predominantly driven by not wanting to sacrifice the accumulated stakes rather than a deeply held affective bond (Crossley et al., 2007). Similarly, person-organization fit might merely indicate value similarity between employees and the organization (Cable & DeRue, 2002), although that similarity does not necessarily lead to the development of a deep attachment. Perceived insider status represents a membership perception (Stamper & Masterson, 2002), but that membership might or might not resonate strongly with the employees. Thus, these three types of OA should generate weaker attachment 14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT benefits.
The above discussion leads us to expect that:
H2: Deep OA relates to health more strongly than does weak OA. The various health outcomes we examine (mental health, physical health, low job burnout, low job strain) are also fundamentally distinct.
Specifically, mental health and
physical health problems can be generated by different stressors (e.g., being undermined mainly
IP
T
creates mental health problems, while bad eating habits mainly creates physical health problems). Thus, treating them as interchangeable is not appropriate in some situations. Job
CR
burnout and job strain are also fundamentally distinctive. Job burnout is an accumulated
US
response to job stressors; employees are unlikely to experience this health threat (e.g., diminished sense of accomplishment) in a short period. On the contrary, job strain, such as In addition, job burnout captures an avoidance
AN
worries, can emerge in even just a few days.
M
orientation that an employee distances himself from further harm in his job role (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993), where job strain often involves negative activating psychological states such
ED
as anxiety, distress, and irritability (Spector, Chen, & O’Connell, 2000).
Finally, job burnout
PT
and strain might contribute to mental and physical health problems over time, but the two are distinct (Toker & Biron, 2012). As overall well-being reflects the well-being in various
CE
domains (e.g., work, marital relationships, family lives, personal hobbies, religions etc.; Binder
AC
& Ward, 2013; Hsieh, 2016), it can be argued that job burnout and strain is not the same as mental and physical health. The abovementioned differences among the four health outcomes lead us to expect significant differences in their strength of the relationship with OA constructs. First, low levels of job burnout and strain reflect well-being in the work domain (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991; Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004), whereas mental and physical health reflect one’s overall wellbeing (Ford et al., 2011).
A generally accepted tenet in organizational research is that one can
expect stronger relationships among phenomena that are at the same level of abstraction 15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT (Behson, 2002). As OA emerges from the work domain, it should accordingly have stronger effects on health outcomes that reflect one’s work well-being, including low levels of burnout and strain. H3: OA relates to work-specific health (i.e., low levels of job burnout and job strain) more strongly than to mental and physical health.
T
In addition, OA represents a psychological construct that should more strongly affect
IP
one’s psychological well-being than one’s physical well-being. Even if better psychological
As OA, low levels of burnout and strain and mental
US
OA’s effects are still likely to be indirect.
CR
well-being ultimately leads to better physical well-being (Gates et al., in press; Hay et al., 1994),
health all capture psychological forces whereas physical health does not, OA should have
AN
stronger effects on these health outcomes than on physical health. Thus, we expect that:
M
H4: The relationship between OA and physical health is weaker than is the relationship between OA and mental health aggregated with work-specific health (i.e., low level of
Method
PT
ED
job burnout and job strain).
Article Search
CE
We began our article search by using keywords in 11 business and psychology databases,
AC
including EBSCOHost, Emerald, Factiva, JSTOR, Oxford Journals, Proquest, PsycINFO, ScienceDirect, Sage Full-Text Collections, Wiley InterScience, and Digital Dissertation Consortium. To be thorough, we set the search period to cover articles published in the last 50 years (1967-2017). The first set of keywords was pertinent to OA. They include “organizational commitment,” “person-organization fit,” “organization-based self-esteem,” “organizational identification,” “organizational trust,” “job or organizational embeddedness,” “perceived insider status,” “psychological ownership,” “perceived organizational membership,” and “relational psychological contracts.” 16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The second set of keywords was health-related and included employees’ “mental wellbeing,” “physical well-being,” “depression,” “psychological distress,” “anxiety,” “illness/sickness/diseases,” “health complaints,” “health symptoms,” “body mass index,” “fatigue,” “burnout,” “emotional exhaustion,” “cynicism,” “depersonalization,” “professional accomplishment,” “negative mood,” “anger,” “hostility,” “job stress,” and “job strain.” In addition,
IP
T
The above keywords were used in each of the aforementioned 11 databases.
in each search, only one keyword was used. The searches identified more than 2,000 articles.
CR
We retained 398 articles that included abstracts that mentioned at least one OA variable and one
US
health variable, and the text provided correlation values. Adopting this exclusion rule increased the likelihood that the retained articles had relevant effect sizes.
AN
Several exclusion criteria were further applied. Six articles that did not operationalize
M
the variables in ways consistent with our study’s conceptualization of OA and health were excluded. Eight articles that measured job stressors, rather than reactions to those stressors,
ED
were excluded. Second, six experimental investigations were excluded, as the strength of effect Third, five articles
PT
sizes might be dependent upon the strength of researchers’ manipulation.
that used student samples were excluded, as these respondents were not actively participating in
CE
the labor market to fully experience the effects of OA on health. Fourth, as OA and health are
AC
both individual-level phenomena, two articles that examined the relationship at an aggregate level were excluded. Finally, as our focus is on OA, two articles that examined attachment to a profession or to a union were excluded. The above steps resulted in a total of 364 articles, which contained 401 studies (N = 230,983). There were 21 dissertations. Eleven percent (11%) were published before 2000, 37% between 2000 and 2010, and 52% in 2011 or after. Across studies that provided sample information, the average age was 38 (18-60 years old, SD = 9), 55% were women, 76% were Caucasians, 59% were married, 59% had children, and 65% had at least some college education. 17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The average job and organizational tenure was 8 and 9 years, respectively. The OA measures, health measures, and internal consistency estimates were coded by the first author. Following Finkelstein, Burke, and Raju (1995), two researchers blind to the purpose of the project were invited to independently code the studies. One researcher coded a random sample of 100 articles (about 25%), whereas the other coded the remaining articles.
IP
T
The coding provided by these two researchers was compared with the original coding conducted by the first author. Overall coding agreement was 95%. Discussion was undertaken to reach
CR
an agreement when there were discrepancies.
US
Measures
Organizational commitment involved measures of affective commitment.
Measures of organizational trust and
AN
and Smith’s (1993) scale was frequently used.
Meyer, Allen,
In cases in which researchers measured
M
identification used the organization as the target.
components of organizational trust, such as affective and cognitive trust, effect sizes were
ED
averaged. Robinson and Rousseau’s (1994) scale was commonly adopted. As managers
PT
represent the organization (Mayer & Gavin, 2005), trust in management was also treated as an indicator of organizational trust, following other researchers (e.g., Harvey, Kelloway & Duncan-
CE
Leiper, 2003). Thus, organizational trust in this study broadly captures employees’ trust in either Mael and Ashforth’s
AC
their organizations or managers who act on behalf of the organizations.
(1992) scale was frequently used to measure organizational identification. Person-organization fit was operationalized with two approaches. Under the objective approach, employees’ values and those of the organization were compared, with greater congruence indicating greater person-organization fit (Dylag, Jaworek, Karwowski, Kozusznik, & Marek, 2013; George & Chattopadhyay, 2005).
Under the subjective approach, employees
were asked to report the extent to which they felt they fit with their organization (Chen & Chiu, 2008), using Cable and DeRue’s (2002) or other scales. Although subjective fit is conceptually 18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT distinct from objective fit (Edwards et al., 2006), we combined them here based on Judge and Cable’s (1997) observation that subjective fit mediated the effects of objective fit on outcomes. In other words, these two types of fit tend to converge and overlap. Organizational embeddedness was operationalized with two approaches: objective and subjective. Under the objective approach, embeddedness was operationalized as the average of
IP
T
fit, links, and sacrifice, the three major components of this construct (Mitchell et al., 2001).
embedded in an organization (Crossley et al., 2007).
CR
Under the subjective approach, embeddedness was operationalized as a global feeling of being
US
Organization-based self-esteem was consistently measured by Pierce et al.’s (1989) scale. Both psychological ownership and perceived insider status were operationalized with established
Perceived insider status is frequently operationalized
M
Van Dyne and Pierce’s (2004) measures.
AN
scales as well. Examples of psychological ownership scales include Avey et al.’s (2008) and
with Stamper and Masterson’s (2002) scale.
ED
Relational psychological contracts were operationalized with two methods. First, some
PT
studies measure employees’ orientation toward sustaining a relational psychological contract with their employers, using Raja et al.’s (2004) or Shore, Tetrick, Lynch, and Barksdale’s (2006)
CE
scale. Second, some studies measure the extent that employees expect their firms to provide
AC
activities that promote long-term relationships with employees, such as training, development opportunities, and personal support (Jamil, Raja, & Darr, 2013; Jing, Xie, & Ning, 2014). Job burnout is typically operationalized by three core components (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Schaufeii, Leiter, Maslach, & Jackson, 1996), including emotional exhaustion, depersonalization or cynicism, and a sense of reduced personal accomplishment or professional efficacy.
Job strain broadly includes various measures of negative affective reactions to work,
such as job frustration, job anxiety, negative mood at work, or the absence of positive mood at work. These elements have been included in past studies of job strain (e.g., Beehr, Jex, Stacy, 19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT & Murray, 2000) and are consistent with Ford et al.’s (2014) premise that job strain encompasses all negative affective and cognitive states as a result of work. Mental health included mental health issues, such as anxiety (Johnson & Joshi, 2016), depression (Fletcher, 1991), and psychological distress (Barling, Bluen, & Fain, 1987). General mood (mood not limited to the work domain) has also been used as an indicator of mental health
T
Physical health was measured by asking respondents to identify
IP
(Ng & Feldman, 2014).
somatic symptoms experienced, such as headache, fatigue, pain, muscle strains, insomnia,
CR
stomachache, and high blood pressure (Schaubroeck & Fink, 1998; ten Brummelhuis, Ter
US
Hoeven, De Jong, & Peper, 2013). This variable was meant to be broad and included any physical or bodily health complaints (Lee, Ashford, & Bobko, 1990). Most studies measured
AN
groups of symptoms and combined them to represent overall physical health. Only a few studies
M
measured one specific type of physical health problem (e.g., muscle pain; Elst et al., 2014). Analytical Procedures
In the first step, the observed correlations were corrected for measurement error.
PT
technique.
ED
Correlations were corrected based on Raju, Burke, Normand, and Langlois’s (1991)
To that end, the observed correlation between a measure of OA and a measure of health was
CE
corrected using the internal reliability estimates reported in the primary studies.
To that end, the corrected
AC
step, the observed correlations were corrected for sampling error.
In the second
correlations between OA and health were aggregated across samples so that sample-size weighted mean effect sizes were obtained. We coded all health measures in a positive direction so that the analysis consistently indicates whether greater OA relates to more positive health.
In
addition, in cases in which more than one relevant effect size was provided in a single study (e.g., a study that reported both organizational commitment and identification or a study that reported both mental and physical health), an average effect size was created to represent that study before it was included in calculation of the overall relationship between OA and health. 20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT As a first step, we determined if aggregating across OA measures and across health measures was reasonable. Table 1 shows the meta-analytical correlations among OA measures. In order to obtain these inter-correlations, an additional 244 articles were gathered. We used keywords that represented the nine OA constructs (e.g., “organizational commitment,” “organizational identification,” and “organizational trust”) in electronic searches and used the
IP
T
same exclusion criteria as before (e.g., excluding experimental studies, excluding student samples) to identify suitable studies. However, for some of the cells in this matrix, empirical
This effect size is similar to effect sizes observed in
US
weighted average correlation was .65.
CR
studies were not available even after a thorough search. We observed that the sample-size
other meta-analyses that create higher-order constructs (Harrison et al., 2006; Judge & Bono,
AN
2001). At the same time, as the shared variance (42%) was less than half, it was prudent that
M
we also provided finer-grained results that separated different indicators of OA (e.g., deep vs. week OA).
ED
A similar analysis was performed on different measures of health (low job burnout, low
PT
job strain, mental health, and physical health). Table 2 shows the meta-analytical correlations among these four measures of health.
In order to derive these correlations, 155 additional
CE
articles were identified, with 61 being from the original pool used in the main analyses. These
AC
articles were identified through electronic keyword searches (e.g., “mental health,” “physical health,” “strain,” and “burnout”). We also used the same exclusion criteria as before to identify suitable studies (e.g., excluding experiments). We found that the sample-size weighted average correlation was .61.
Again, as the shared variance (37%) was less than half, it was prudent that
we also provided fine-grained results which treated different indicators of health as separate and meaningful aggregates (e.g., general health vs. work-specific health). Results Table 3 shows the meta-analyzed correlations.
In the Appendix, we provide the meta21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT analytical correlation between each of the OA constructs and each of the health outcomes, whenever we had at least two primaries studies addressing the same disaggregated relationships. H1 predicts OA positively relates to health. Across 401 samples (N = 230,983), OA was positively related to health at .38 (95% CI = .36, .40), suggesting that OA was a positive correlate of health. This effect size can be described as strong (Cohen, 1988). To lend further
Thus, it can be described as moderate in strength.
The effect size was .25 (95% CI = .16, .34). Several specific OA-health relationships
CR
(the time interval ranged from 3 weeks to 3 years).
IP
T
insight into this relationship, we identified 19 studies in which OA was measured prior to health
US
demonstrated strong effect sizes, including the relational contracts-mental health (.52), organizational commitment-low job burnout (.46), and organizational trust-low job burnout
AN
relationships (.41). These findings support H1.
M
H2 predicts that deep OA (i.e., organizational identification, organization-based selfesteem, and psychological ownership) relates to health more strongly than does weak OA (i.e.,
ED
person-organization fit, organizational embeddedness, and perceived insider status). The
PT
comparison tests were conducted with the approach adopted by others who performed effect size comparisons in meta-analyses (Steel & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2002; Wright & Bonett, 2002).
In
CE
this procedure, the moderator in question (e.g., deep vs. weak OA type) was used as an
AC
independent variable to predict, in a weighted least squares multiple regression, the corrected correlations.
If the moderator was a significant predictor, then it indicates significant between-
group differences driven by the moderator. As shown in Table 3, the average of deep OA (organizational identification, organizationbased self-esteem, psychological ownership) was related to health at .36 (95% CI = .31, .41), and was significantly stronger (p < .05) than the effect size associated with the average of weak OA (person-organization fit, organizational embeddedness, perceived insider status) on health (.26, 95% CI = .21, .31). Post-hoc analyses showed that it was largely the difference in mental 22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT health that drove this difference; deep OA, on average, was related to mental health (.41) more strongly than was weak OA (.25). Strong and weak OA did not differ in their effects on low job burnout and low job strain.
Overall, H2 received support.
H3 predicts that OA relates to low job burnout and job strain as an aggregate more strongly than to mental and physical health as an aggregate. As shown in Table 3, the effect of
IP
T
OA on the average of low job burnout and low job strain (.41, 95% CI = .40, .42) was significantly stronger (p < .01) than the effect of OA on the average of mental and physical
CR
health (.35, 95% CI = .33, .37). Post-hoc analyses showed that the difference was driven by
US
organizational embeddedness, OBSE, organizational commitment, and organizational trust. That is, these variables have significantly stronger effects on work-related health (.30, .53, .43,
AN
and .41, respectively) than on general health (.06, .32, .36, and .26, respectively).
M
supported.
H3 was thus
H4 predicts that OA relates to physical health more weakly than to mental health, low job
ED
burnout, and low job strain as an aggregate. As shown in Table 3, OA was related to physical
PT
health (.30, 95% CI = .26, .34), and the magnitude of this effect size was significantly weaker (p < .01) than the effect of OA on the average of mental health, low job burnout, and low job strain Post-hoc analyses revealed that the difference was driven by
CE
(.39, 95% CI = .37, .41).
AC
organizational embeddedness, OBSE, organizational commitment, and organizational trust. These variables have significantly weaker effects (p < .05) on physical health (-.06, .27, .32, and .23, respectively) than on the combination of mental health, low job burnout, and low job strain (.24, .47, .40, and .32, respectively). These results support H4. Discussion Implications for Theory Development Researchers have studied different types of OA (e.g., Masterson & Stamper, 2003; Meyer et al., 2002; Riketta, 2005), as employees with stronger OA are often more productive and loyal. 23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The benefits of promoting OA, thus, are evident from an organization’s standpoint. From an individual’s standpoint, though, it is unclear why one should develop strong OA, especially when job mobility has become the norm rather than the exception over the last few decades (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Briscoe, Henagan, Burton, & Murphy, 2012). We contribute to the literature by demonstrating that OA is associated with health
T
Being attached to an attachment figure has been shown to be
IP
benefits for individuals.
therapeutic (Lopez & Brennan, 2000); we extend that premise to the workplace arena and show
CR
that, regardless of the specific form, OA was generally related to better employee health,
US
including greater mental and physical well-being and lower job burnout and strain. This finding also contributes to occupational health psychology by showing that the work
AN
domain can significantly promote the health of an individual. This is important, as existing
M
approaches that examine the effects of work on health typically focus on how overinvestment in the work domain undermines one’s health (Ganster & Rosen, 2013; Ganster & Schaubroeck,
ED
1991). Extending that perspective, this study suggests that being attached to an organization is
PT
not detrimental to one’s health. Guided by attachment theory, this study indeed argues that OA provides many attachment benefits, thereby generating positive effects on employee health.
CE
In addition, this study contributes to the literature by integrating two domains that have First, there are at
AC
been extensively examined using different, but closely related, constructs.
least nine different types of OA. We provided both theoretical reasons and empirical evidence as to why they are positively correlated but distinctive. While all nine OA types motivate individuals to stay at the organization and work hard, some OA types represent a deeper form of attachment, such as those that assimilate one’s self-concept with the organization’s entity, whereas others represent weaker types of attachment, such as those that merely tie individuals to the relationship through membership. Despite these differences, our meta-analytical results still showed that different types of 24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT OA were quite strongly correlated (averaged correlation = .65), suggesting that it is important for future research to either further distinguish the different OA constructs by comparing their strength of association with other important correlates (like we did here) or provide some integration of the overlapping literature. For instance, the notion of person-organization fit is
IP
on the latter can be legitimately built on the research on the former.
T
already incorporated in the construct of organizational embeddedness, and therefore the research
At the same time, we have also presented empirical evidence that deeper OA had
CR
generally stronger relationships with health than did weaker OA. Similarly, in the health
indicators examined are inter-related but distinct.
US
domain, we have provided both theoretical reasons and empirical evidence that the four For instance, we have shown that OA tended
AN
to have weaker effects on physical health than on mental health, as OA represents a
M
psychological, rather than physiological, experience. Researchers are therefore encouraged to provide strong theoretical rationales for their choice of OA or health or both, as we have
ED
demonstrated that there are subtle differences between them, manifested in different strengths of
PT
association with their correlates.
Implications for Future Research
CE
The abovementioned findings show to researchers who examined OA that they should
AC
consider health as one of the possible study outcomes, in addition to the typical consequences of OA, like job performance and turnover. As individuals who are healthier tend to perform better (Ford et al., 2011), future theories that address OA and job performance should consider the incorporation of health variables as a possible mediating or feedback mechanism. Second, researchers should probe the differences between different types of OA, and this study has laid the groundwork for that avenue.
We have provided theoretical reasons and
empirical evidence for why the various indicators of OA converge and diverge. Some more specific comparisons can be conducted in future research, such as the different attachment 25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT benefits generated by deep OA (e.g., organization-based self-esteem, psychological ownership) and weak OA (e.g., person-organization fit, organizational embeddedness). There are three OA constructs that we did not categorize into either deep or weak bonds, including organizational commitment and trust and relational psychological contract. They do not involve integration of self-concepts with the organization, but they are not merely
IP
T
perceptions of membership. Commitment captures a sense of belonging whereas trust and relational psychological contracts are based on positive expectation of future conduct and
CR
promises. Their relationship with heath was between .30 and .39. Future research should
strengthened.
US
identify under what conditions the effects of these three types of OA on health can be For instance, the effects on negative health might be accentuated when the
AN
expectation or promise that is central to trust and relational psychological contract is unmet. The
M
fact that psychological contract breach has robust negative effects on employees’ affective wellbeing (Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski, & Bravo, 2007) lends credit to such conjecture.
ED
In addition, some of the effect sizes were small.
For example, organizational
PT
identification as a specific OA type deserves more attention, as it did not have an especially strong relationship with health. As shown in Table 3, its relationship with health (.31) was the
CE
same as that of person-organization fit (.31), although we have argued that identification
AC
represented a deeper form of OA than does person-organization fit. One possible explanation is that, in order to integrate one’s identity with that of the organization, one must establish some sort of similarity with the organization, which was captured by person-organization fit. Without this basis, the resulted identity might be fragile. Moreover, future research into job strain as a specific indicator of health is also needed. For instance, the relationships of low job burnout and low job strain with OA were markedly different (.45 vs. .32, p < .05). On the contrary, we observed that OA’s relationship with physical health (.30) was not different from that of low job strain (.32), despite the argument that 26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT OA should affect job strain more strongly, as they are both psychological in nature. These results suggest that the extent to which low job strain overlaps with mental and physical health was perhaps underestimated in the existing research. One possibility is that job strain, as an immediate response to acute job stressors, evokes intense emotional and physiological reactions that become mental and physical health issues over time.
In addition, we observed that only
IP
T
four studies focused on one specific physical health symptom (e.g., Elst et al., 2004). It is possible that the OA-health relationship is weaker when a specific health complaint, rather than
CR
overall physical health, is measured; for instance, we found that, across the four empirical studies
US
that measured a specific health complaint, the relationship with OA was only .03. Another possible research avenue is to incorporate the positive OA-health relationship
AN
into workaholism research. Workaholism has been shown to relate to negative health outcomes
M
(Clark, Michel, Zhdanova, Pui, & Baltes, 2016). Our findings, however, indicate that OA is associated with positive health. The key to understanding these different findings is that
ED
workaholism implies an over-investment in work tasks (Ng, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2007), and
PT
this investment does not necessarily reflect stronger feelings of being tied to the organization. OA research, on the other hand, focuses more on the positive sense of attachment to an
CE
organization and how it affects employees. Thus, perhaps if researchers focus on the group of
AC
workaholics who also feel attached to their organizations (in addition to just to their work), they are more likely to identify the positive outcomes of workaholism. Finally, future research should also consider operationalizing the attachment benefits we have outlined in this study, as it is important to first understand why being attached to an organization is psychologically and physiologically beneficial and then use that theoretical basis to identify mediating mechanisms.
In so doing, the different attachment benefits generated by
various types of OA can be identified, which in turn facilitates researchers to compare findings for the OA-outcome relationship across various types of OA. 27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Several limitations deserve more empirical research as well.
First, most of the empirical
studies included here adopted cross-sectional designs, and future studies should consider using more longitudinal designs.
We did identify a subset of time-lagged studies that measured OA
prior to health, and the result showed that OA was associated with greater subsequent health. Future research should design different longitudinal studies to extend this observation.
Because OA represented employees’
IP
research should consider using non-self-report measures.
T
Second, all of the study variables were self-reported in the original studies; future
CR
subjective feelings of attachments to their own organizations, the use of self-report OA was
US
inevitable. Although objective (physiological) measures of health are desirable, we were not able to identify any OA studies that reported such measures, suggesting a research gap. Third
AN
and finally, as our focus was on clarifying the theoretical and empirical nature of the OA-health
M
relationship, we did not examine moderators. However, some groups or cultures might experience the OA-health relationship more strongly, especially those that value attachment and
PT
differences.
Future research should therefore explore cross-cultural
ED
belonging, like collectivists.
Implications for Managerial Practice
CE
This study suggests to managers that employees who feel attached to their organization not
AC
only are likely to be more productive and loyal, but they are also likely to be healthier. Thus, there are strong reasons to continue to promote employee attachment, as that attachment is likely to benefit both the individual and the organization. We have argued that OA enhances one’s well-being largely because it provides many attachment benefits, such as a sense of security and belonging, self-worth, confidence in protection, and satisfaction of socioemotional needs. Although we have shown to managers that different types of OA have parallel positive effects on health, we have also alerted them to the subtle differences across the nine OA types. These OA types have different substantive bases, with some more likely to affect health strongly 28
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT whereas others more likely to affect health only mildly. Managers, therefore, are strongly advised to understand the psychological bases of their employees’ OA; for instance, if OA is only based on the fact that the employee has been a core member of the organization, perhaps managers should endeavor to cultivate deeper bonds that link employees’ self-concepts to the organization.
2000; Morrow, 2011).
IP
T
We also hope to draw managers’ attention to employees with weak OA (Beck & Wilson, In addition to being a turnover risk, these employees are vulnerable to Their poor health might not
CR
health problems because of the deprivation of attachment benefits.
tasks are interdependent.
US
only affect their own productivity, but also interfere with their coworkers’ productivity if their Thus, it is vital that managers identify employees that have weak OA
AN
so that corresponding actions addressing the abovementioned management problems (e.g.,
M
turnover, declining productivity) can be planned. Conclusion
ED
OA has been a pillar of vocational behavior research; many studies in this area have
PT
investigated how to promote employees’ attachment to their organizations, which in turn should lower organizational turnover and strengthen organizational productivity.
We adopt a different
CE
perspective and focus on why and how OA might benefit employees themselves in terms of
AC
promoting their health. Data gathered from multiple studies showed that OA had a non-trivial positive relationship with employee health and that the relationship varied across different types of OA and different health outcomes. We hope that these results draw researchers’ attention to the fact that OA may be an important precursor of one’s good health and that there are both similarities and differences across the existing indicators of OA and health.
29
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT References Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). principle.
The boundaryless career as a new employment
In M. B. Arthur & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career (pp. 3-
20). New York: Oxford University Press.
T
Ashforth, B. E. & Mael, F. A. (1989). Social identity theory and the organisation. Academy of
IP
Management Review, 14, 20-39.
CR
Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Gorley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34, 325-374. Ashman, I., & Winstanley, D. (2007). For or against corporate identity? Personalification and the
US
problem of moral agency. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 83-95. Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Crossley, C. R., & Luthans, F. (2008). Psychological ownership:
AN
Theoretical extensions and analysis of a multi-dimensional theory-based measure. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 1-19.
M
Avey, J. B., Wu, K., & Holley, E. (2015). The influence of abusive supervision and job emebddedness on citizenship and deviance. Journal of Business Ethics, 129, 721-731.
ED
Baba, V. V., Jamal, M., & Tourigny, L. (1998). Work and mental health: A decade in Canadian research. Canadian Psychology, 39, 94-107.
PT
Barling, J., Bluen, S. D., & Fain, R. (1987). Psychological functioning following an acute disaster. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 683-690.
CE
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529. Beck, K., & Wilson, C. (2000). Development of affective organizational commitment: A cross-
AC
sequential examination of change with tenure. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 114136.
Beehr, T. A., Jex, S. M., Stacy, B. A., & Murray, M. A. (2000). Work stressors and coworker support as predictors of individual strain and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 391-405. Behson, S. J. (2002). Which dominates? The relative importance of work-family organizational support and general organizational context on employee outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 53–72. Binder, M., & Ward, F. (2013). The structure of subjective well-being: A vector autoregressive approach. Metroeconomica, 64, 361-400. 30
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. New York: Basic Books. Briscoe, J. P., Henagan, S. C., Burton, J. P., & Murphy, W. M. (2012). Coping with an insecure employment environment: The differing roles of protean and boundaryless career orientations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 308-316. Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 875-884. Cable, D. M., & Edwards, J. R. (2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and
T
empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 822-834.
IP
Chen, C., & Chiu, S. (2008). An integrative model linking supervisor support and organizational
CR
citizenship behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 23, 1-10. Chen, Z. X., & Aryee, S. (2007). Delegation and employee work outcomes: An examination of the cultural context of mediating processes in China. Academy of Management Journal,
US
50, 226-238.
Clark, M. A., Michel, J. S., Zhdanova, L., Pui, S. Y., & Baltes, B. B. (2016). All work and no
AN
play? A meta-analytic examination of the correlates and outcomes of workaholism. Journal of Management, 42, 1836-1873.
M
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
ED
Collins, N. L., & Feeney, B. C. (2000). A safe haven: An attachment theory perspective on support seeking and caregiving in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and
PT
Social Psychology, 78, 1053-1073.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity:
CE
A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 909-927. Conway, N., & Briner, R. B. (2002). A daily diary study of affective responses to psychological 302.
AC
contract breach and exceeded promises. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 287Cooper-Hakim, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The construct of work commitment: Testing an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 241-259. Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and an integration of research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18, 621-656. Crossley, C. D., Bennett, R. J., Jex, S. M., & Burnfield, J. L. (2007). Development of a global measure of job embeddedness and integration into a traditional model of voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1031-1042. De Croon, E. M., Sluiter, J. K., Blonk, R. W. B., Broersen, J. J., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. W. 31
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT (2004). Stressful work, psychological job strain, and turnover: A 2-year propective cohort study of truck drivers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 442-454. Dickstein, S. (1999). Confidence in protection: A developmental psychopathology perspective. Journal of Family Psychology, 13, 484-487. Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytical findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628. Dutton, J. E., Roberts, L. M., & Bednar, J. (2010). Pathways for positive identity construction at
T
work: Four types of positive identity and the building of social resources. Academy of
IP
Management Review, 35, 265–293
CR
Dykas, M. J., & Cassidy, J. (2011). Attachment and the processing of social information across the life span: Theory and evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 19-46. Dylag, A., Jaworek, M., Karwowski, W., Kozusznik, M., & Marek, T. (2013). Discrepancy
US
between individual and organizational values: Occupational burnout and work engagement among white-collar workers. International Journal of Industrial
AN
Ergonomics, 43, 225-231.
M
Easterbrooks, M. A., & Biringen, Z. (2000). Mapping the terrain of emotional availability and attachment. Attachment and Human Development, 2, 123-129.
ED
Edwards, J. R., Cable, D. M., Williamson, I. O., Lambert, L. S., & Shipp, A. J. (2006). The phenomenology of fit: Linking the person and environment to the subjective experience
PT
of person-environment fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 802-827. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived
CE
organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507. Elst, T. V., Richter, A., Sverke, M., Naswall, K., De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2014). Threat of losing valued job features: The role of perceived control in mediating the effect of
AC
qualitative job insecurity on job strain and psychological withdrawal. Work and Stress, 28, 143-164.
Feeney, J. A. (2000).
Implications of attachments style for patterns of health and illness. Child:
Care, Health and Development, 26, 277-288. Feeney, J. A., & Ryan, S. M. (1994). Attachment style and affect regulation: Relationships with health behavior and family experiences of illness in a student sample. Health Psychology, 13, 334-345. Finkelstein, L. M., Burke, M. J., & Raju, N. S. 1995. Age discrimination in simulated employment contexts: An integrative analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 652663. 32
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Fletcher, C. (1991). Candidates’ reactions to assessment centres and their outcomes: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64, 117-127. Folkins, C. H., & Sime, W. E. (1981). Physical fitness training and mental health. American Psychologist, 36, 373-389. Ford, M. T., Cerasoli, C. P., Higgins, J. A., & Decresare, A. L. (2011). Relationships between psychological, physical, and behavioral health and work performance: A review and meta-analysis. Work and Stress, 25, 185-204.
T
Ford, M. T., Matthews, R. A., Woolbridge, J. D., Mishra, V., Kakar, U. M. et al. (2014). How do
IP
occupational stressor-strain effects vary with time? A review and meta-analysis of the
CR
relevance of time lags in longitudinal studies. Work and Stress, 28, 9-30. Galinha, I. G., Oishi, S., Pereira, C. R., Wirtz, D., & Esteves, F. (2014). Adult attachment, love styles, relationship experiences, and subjective well-being: Cross-cultural and gender
US
comparison between Americans, Portuguese, and Mozambicans. Social Indicators Research, 119, 823-852.
AN
Ganster, D. C. (2008). Measurement challenges for studying work-related stressors and strains. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 259-270.
M
Ganster, D. C., & Rosen, C. C. (2013). Work stress and employee health: A multidisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 39, 1085-1122.
ED
Ganster, D. C., & Schaubroeck, J. (1991). Work, stress and employee health. Journal of Management, 17, 235-271.
PT
Gates, K., Petterson, S., Wingrove, P., Miller, B., & Klink, K. (in press). You can’t treat what you don’t diagnose: An analysis of the recognition of somatic presentations of depression
CE
and anxiety in prime time. Families, Systems, and Health. George, E., & Chattopadhyay, P. (2005). One foot in each camp: The dual identification of contract workers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 68-99.
AC
Gini, A. (1998). Work, identity and self: How we are formed by the work we do. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 707–714. Grant, A. M., Christanson, M. K., & Price, R. H. (2007). Happiness, health, or relationships? Managerial practices and employee well-being tradeoffs. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21, 51-63. Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of Management, 30, 859-879. Han, T., Chiang, H., McConville, D., & Chiang, C. (2015). A longitudinal investigation of person-organization fit, person-job fit, and contextual performance: The mediating role of psychological ownership. Human Performance, 28, 425-439. 33
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L. (2006). How important are job attitudes? Metaanalytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 305-325. Harvey, S., Kelloway, E. K., & Duncan-Leiper, L. (2003). Trust in management as a buffer of the relationships between overload and strain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 306-315. Hay, R. D., Marshall, G. N., Wang, E. Y. I., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1994). Four-year cross-lagged
IP
of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 62, 441-449.
T
associations between physical and mental health in the medical outcomes study. Journal
CR
Hazan, C., & Shaver, R. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270-280.
Hintsanen, M., Jokela, M., Pulkki-Raback, L., Viikari, J., & Keltikanga-Jarvinen, L. (2010).
US
Associations of youth and adulthood body-mass index and waist-hip ratio with attachment styles and dimensions. Current Psychology, 29, 257-271.
AN
Hsieh, C. (2016). Domain importance in subjective well-being measures. Social Indicators Research, 127, 777-792.
M
Hui, C., Lee, C., & Wang, H. (2015). Organizational inducements and employee citizenship Behavior: The mediating role of perceived insider status and the moderating role of
ED
collectivism. Human Resource Management, 54, 439-456. Hunter, L. W., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2007). Feeling the heat: Effects of stress, commitment, and
PT
job experience on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 953-968. Jamil, A., Raja, U., & Darr, W. (2013). Psychological contract types as moderator in the beach-
CE
violation and violation-burnout relationships. The Journal of Psychology, 147, 491-515. Jing, R., Xie, J. L., & Ning, J. (2014). Commitment to organizational change in a Chinese context. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29, 1098-1114.
AC
Johnson, T. D., & Joshi, A. (2016). Dark clouds or silver linings? A stigma threat perspective on the implications of an autism diagnosis for workplace well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 430-449. Joplin, J. R., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (1999). Attachment behavior and health: Relationships at work and home. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 783-796. Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80-92. Judge, T. A., & Cable, D. M. (1997). Applicant personality, organizational culture, and organizational attraction. Personnel Psychology, 50, 359-394. 34
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Kahill, S. (1988). Symptoms of professional burnout: A review of empirical evidence. Canadian Psychology, 29, 284-297. Keller, H. (2008). Attachment – past and present. But what about the future? Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42, 406-415. Kim, T., Aryee, S., Loi, R., & Kim, S. (2013). Person-organization fit and employee outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24, 3719-3737.
T
Knapp, J. R., Smith, B. R., & Sprinkle, T. A. (2014). Clarifying the relational ties of
IP
organizational belonging: Understanding the roles of perceived insider status,
CR
psychological ownership, and organizational identification. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 21, 273-285.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of
US
individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, persongroup, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281-342.
AN
La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need
M
fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 367-384. Lambert, L. S., Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. M. (2003). Breach and fulfillment of the
ED
psychological contract: A comparison of traditional and expanded views. Personnel Psychology, 56, 895-934.
PT
Le, H., Schmidt, F. L., Harter, J. K., & Lauver, K. J. (2010). The problem of empirical redundancy of constructs in organizational research: An empirical investigation.
CE
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112, 112-115. Leck, J. D., & Saunders, D. M. (1992). Hirschman’s loyalty: Attitude or behavior? Employee Responsibilties and Rights Journal, 5, 219-230.
AC
Lee, C., Ashford, S. J., & Bobko, P. (1990). Interactive effects of Type A behavior and perceived control on worker performance, job satisfaction, and somatic complaints. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 870-881. Lee, E., Park, T., & Koo, B. (2015). Identifying organizational identification as a basis for attitudes and behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 1049-1080. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123-133. LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 52-65. 35
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between men and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 370-390. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23, 438-458. Lopez, F. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). Dynamic processes underlying adult attachment organization: Toward an attachment theoretical perspective on the healthy and effective self. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 283-300.
T
Luyten, P., Van Houdenhove, B., Lemma, A., Target, M., & Fonagy, P. (2013). Vulnerability for
IP
functional somatic disorders: A contemporary psychodynamic approach. Journal of
CR
Psychotherapy Integration, 23, 250-262.
Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
US
13, 103-123.
Markvits, Y., Ullrich, J., Van Dick, R., & Davis, A. J. (2008). Regulatory foci and organizational
AN
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 485-489. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
M
Psychology, 52, 397-422.
Masterson, S. S., & Stamper, C. L. (2003). Perceived organizational membership: An aggregate
ED
frameworks suggesting the employee-organization relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 473-490.
PT
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.
CE
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734. Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the
AC
shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874888.
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 24-59. McAllister, D. J., & Bigley, G. A. (2002). Work context and the definition of self: How organizational care influences organization-based self-esteem. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 894-904. McWilliams, L. A., & Bailey, S. J. (2010). Associations between adult attachment ratings and health conditions: Evidence from the National Comorbidity Survey replication. Health Psychology, 29, 446-453. 36
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Meuwly, N., Bodenmann, G., Bardbury, T. N., Ditzen, B., & Heinrichs, M. (2012). Dyadic coping, insecure attachment, and cortisol stress recovery following experimentally induced stress. Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 937-947. Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Gellatly, I. R. (1990). Affective and continuance commitment to the organization: Evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 710-720. Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and
T
occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal
IP
of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.
CR
Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis and integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 9911007.
US
Meyer, J. P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 299-326.
AN
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolyntsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents,
M
correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20-52. Michel, A., O’Shea, D., & Hoppe, A. (2015). Designing and evaluating resource-oriented
ED
interventions to enhance employee well-being and health. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88, 459-463.
PT
Mikulincer, M. (1998). Attachment working models and the sense of trust: An exploration of interaction goals and affect regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,
CE
1209-1224.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
AC
Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M. (2001). Why people stay: Using organizational embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1102-1121. Morrow, P. C. (1983). Concept redundancy in organizational research: The case of work commitment. Academy of Management Review, 8, 486-500. Morrow, P. C. (2011). Managing organizational commitment: Insights from longitudinal research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79, 18-35. Neff, K. D., & McGehee, P. (2010). Self-compassion and psychological resilience among adolescents and young adults. Self and Identity, 9, 225-240. Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2014). Embeddedness and well-being in the United States and 37
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Singapore: The mediating effects of work-to-family and family-to-work conflict. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19, 360-375. Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2007). Dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of workaholism: A conceptual integration and extension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 111-136. O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification and internalization on prosocial
T
behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.
IP
Park, T., & Shaw, J. D. (2013). Turnover rates and organizational performance: A meta-analysis.
CR
Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 268-309.
Pascoe, E. A., & Richman, L. S. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531-554.
US
Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational context: A review of the organization-based self-esteem literature. Journal of Management, 30,
AN
591-622.
Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1989). Organization-based
M
self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 622-648.
ED
Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26, 298-310.
PT
Pietomonaco, P. R., Uchino, B., & Schetter, C. D. (2013). Close relationship processes and health: Implications of attachment theory for health and disease. Health Psychology, 32,
CE
499-513.
Pryor, R. G., & Davies, R. (1989). A comparison of conceptualizations of work centrality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 283-289.
AC
Puig, J., Englund, M. M., Simpson, J. A., & Collins, W. A. (2013). Predicting adult physical illness from infant attachment: A prospective longitudinal study. Health Psychology, 32, 409-417.
Raja, U., Johns, G., & Ntalians, F. (2004). The impact of personality on psychological contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 350-367. Raju, N. S., Burke, M. J., Normand, J., & Langlois, G. M. (1991). A new meta-analytic approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 432-446. RaqueBogdan, T. L., Ericson, S. K., Jackson, J., Martin, H. M., & Byran, N. A. (2011). Attachment and mental and physical health: Self-compassion and mattering as mediators. 38
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 272-278. Riketta, M. (2005). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 358-384. Rivkin, W., Diestel, S., & Schmidt, K. H. (2015). Affective commitment as a moderator of the adverse relationships between day-specific self-control demands and psychological wellbeing. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88, 185-194. Robbins, J. M., Ford, M. T., & Tetrick, L. E. (2012). Perceived unfairness and employee health:
T
A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 235-272.
IP
Robinson, S. L., & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: Not the
CR
exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 245-259. Rom, E., & Mikulincer, M. (2003). Attachment theory and group processes: The association between attachment styles and group-related representations, goals, memories, and
US
functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1220-1235. Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A
AN
theoretical
integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91-127.
M
Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 121-139.
ED
Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
PT
Rousseau, D. M. (1998). Why workers still identify with organizations. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 19, 217-233.
CE
Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529-565.
AC
Schaubroeck, J., & Fink, L. (1998). Facilitating and inhibiting effects of job control and social support on stress outcomes and role behavior: A contingency model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 167-195. Schaufeii, W. B., Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C, & Jackson, S. E. (1996). MBI-General Survey. In C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Maslach Bumout Inventory manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Pyschologists Press. Schonfled, I. S., & Bianchi, R. (2016). Burnout and depression: Two entities or one? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 72, 22-37. Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32, 344-354. 39
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Sedikides, C. (1993). Assessment, enhancement, and verification determinants of the selfevaluation process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 317-338. Selcuk, E., Zayas, V., Gunaydin, G., Hazan, C., & Kross, E. (2012). Mental representations of attachment figures facilitate recovery following upsetting autobiographical memory recall. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 362-378. Shapiro, D. L., Hom, P., Shen, W., & Agarwal, R. (2016). How do leader departures affects
T
subordinates’ organizational attachment? A 360-degree relational perspective. Academy
IP
of Management Review, 41, 479-502.
CR
Shore, L. M., Barksdale, K., & Shore, T. H. (1995). Managerial perceptions of employee commitment to the organization. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1593-1615. Shore, T. H., Bommer, W. H., & Shore, L. M. (2008). An integrative model of managerial
US
perceptions of employee commitment: Antecedents and influences on employee treatment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 635-655.
AN
Shore, L. M., Tetrick, L. E., Lynch, P., & Barksdale, K. (2006). Social and economic exchange: Construct development and validation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 837-
M
867.
Silverman, D. K. (1998). The tie that binds: Affect regulation, attachment, and psychoanalysis.
ED
Psychoanalytic Psychology, 15, 187-212. Simmons, B. L., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (2003). Health for the hopeful: A study of
PT
attachment behavior in home health care nurses. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 361-375.
CE
Singh, J. (1991). Redundancy in constructs: Problem, assessment, and an illustrative example. Journal of Business Research, 22, 255-280.
AC
Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2015). Recovery from job stress: The stressor-detachment model as an integrative framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, S72-S103. Sonnentag, S., Venz, L., & Casper, A. (2017). Advances in recovery research: What have we learned? What should be done next? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22, 365-380. Spector, P. E., Chen, P. Y., & O’Connell, B. J. (2000). A longitudinal study of relations between job stressors and job strains while controlling for prior negative affectivity and strains. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 211-218. Stamper, C. L., & Masterson, S. S. (2002). Insider or outsider? How employee perceptions of insider status affect their work behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 87540
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 894. Steel, P. D., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2002). Comparing meta-analytic moderator estimation techniques under realistic conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 96-111. Ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Ter Hoeven, C. L., De Jong, M. O. T., & Peper, B. (2013). Exploring the linkage between the home domain and absence from work: Health, motivation, or both? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 273-290.
T
Toker, S., & Biron, M. (2012). Job burnout and depression: Unraveling their temporal
IP
relationship and considering the role of physical activity. Journal of Applied Psychology,
CR
97, 699-710.
Trumble, R., & Pattath, P. (2013). Rising healthcare costs – challenges and options for businesses. Journal of Compensation and Benefits, 29, 19-27.
US
Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior.
AN
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 439-459.
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (1992). Examining the causal order of job satisfaction and
M
organizational commitment. Journal of Management, 18, 153-167. Wang, J., & Kim, T. (2013). Proactive socialization behavior in China: The mediating role of
ED
perceived insider status and the moderating role of supervisors’ traditionality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 389-406.
PT
Wells, L. E. (2001). Self-esteem and social inequality. In T. J. Owens, Stryker, S., & N. Goodman (Eds.), Extending self-esteem theory and research: Sociological and
CE
psychological currents (pp. 301-329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Widmer, P. S., Semmer, N. K., Kalin, W., Jacobshagen, N., & Meier, L. L. (2012). The ambivalence of challenge stressors: Time pressure associated with both negative and
AC
positive well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 422-433. Williams, M. (2001). In whom we trust: Group membership as an affective context for trust development.
Academy of Management Review, 26, 377-396.
Wright, T. A., & Bonett, D. G. (2002). The moderating effects of employee tenure on the relationship between organizational commitment and job performance: A metaanalysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1183-1190. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., & Illies, R. (2012). Everyday working life: Explaining withinperson fluctuations in employee well-being. Human Relations, 65, 1051-1069. Yun, S., Takeuchi, R., & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity 41
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 745-756. Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., & Bravo, J. (2007). The impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60,
AC
CE
PT
ED
M
AN
US
CR
IP
T
647-680.
42
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 1. Meta-Analytical Correlations among Specific Measures of Organizational Attachment. 8
1. OC
-------
2. OT
.57
2
(53,
3
4
5
6
7
PT
1
-------
.57
(34,
(12,
20341)
4393)
.76
.72
.53
(31,
(1,
(2,
41655)
338)
588)
5.
.53
.52
.42
.72
OBSE
(30,
(1,
(2,
(1,
-------
9778)
186)
1089)
6.
.64
.81
POF
(33,
(1,
13890)
335)
.63
.28
RPC
NU
-------
D
-------
PT E
242)
.50
.75
.52
(6,
(1,
(1,
1612)
643)
199)
.51
.62
.52
.53
CE
7.
AC
4. OE
SC
.74
MA
RI
37403)
3. OI
-------
(20,
(3,
(4,
(4,
(1,
(1,
6803)
530)
1168)
2150)
84)
314)
8.
.65
N/A
.64
N/A
.64
N/A
POW
(14,
(1,
(5,
4049)
347)
3672)
9. PIS
.57
N/A
9
.62
N/A
.65
-------
N/A -------
N/A
.46
.65
(2,
(1,
(2,
(1,
(1,
316)
347)
354)
289)
347)
N-------
weighted ρ =
.65 43
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC
CE
PT E
D
MA
NU
SC
RI
PT
Note. The first figure in parentheses represents the number of studies cumulated (k). The second figure represents the total sample size (N). OC = organizational commitment; OT = organizational trust; OI = organizational identification; OE = organizational embeddedness; OBSE = organization-based self-esteem; POF = person-organization fit; RPC = relational psychological contracts; POW = psychological ownership; PIS = perceived insider status; N/A = unavailable; ρ = corrected correlation.
44
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2. Meta-Analytical Correlations among Specific Measures of Health. 1
2. Low job strain
.49 (19, 5348)
.54 .60 (46, 27065) (14, 3070)
-------
.65 .49 (40, 38995) (10, 2182)
.63 (75, 92788) -------
N-weighted ρ = .61
NU
4. Physical health
5
-------
SC
3. Mental health
4
PT
-------
3
RI
1. Low job burnout
2
AC
CE
PT E
D
MA
Note. The first figure in parentheses represents the number of studies cumulated (k). The second figure represents the total sample size (N); ρ = corrected correlation.
45
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 3. The Relationships of Organizational Attachment and Health. N
95% CI
90% CV
rc
SD
230,983
401
.38
.17
.36/.40
.10/.66
200,151
322
.39
.17
.37/.41
.11/.67
Organizational trust – health
11,915
23
.31
.10
.27/.35
.15/.47
Organizational identification – health
11,692
27
.31
.18
.24/.38
.01/.61
Person-organization fit – health
6,171
18
.31
.16
.24/.38
.05/.57
Organizational embeddedness – health
6,422
12
.23
.16
.14/.32
-.03/.49
Organization-based self-esteem – health
5,470
15
.42
.19
.32/.52
.11/.73
Psychological ownership – health
1,521
3
.47
.09
.37/.57
.32/.62
781
3
.20
.13
.05/.35
-.01/.41
1,474
6
.30
.26
.09/.51
-.13/.73
18,683
46
.36
.19
.31/.41
.05/.67
13,374
33
.26
.16
.21/.31
.00/.52
115,799
143
.37
.07
.36/.38
.25/.49
OA - physical health
47,796
47
.30
.13
.26/.34
.09/.51
OA - low job burnout
76,161
166
.45
.19
.42/.48
.14/.76
OA - low job strain
34,333
92
.32
.20
.28/.36
-.01/.65
OA - mental and physical health
163,595
190
.35
.15
.33/.37
.10/.60
OA - low job burnout and strain
110,494
258
.41
.12
.40/.42
.21/.61
OA - mental health, low job burnout and
226,293
401
.39
.18
.37/.41
.09/.69
Deep OA (organizational identification,
self-esteem, and psychological ownership) - health
MA
organization-based
NU
Perceived insider status – health Relational psychological contract – health
RI
Organizational commitment – health
SC
Overall relationship
PT
k
Weak OA (organizational embeddedness,
D
person-
PT E
organization fit, and perceived insider status) - health
AC
CE
OA - mental health
strain
Note. N = cumulative sample size; k = number of studies cumulated; rc = sample-size weighted corrected correlation; SD = standard deviation of rc; CI = confidence intervals for rc; CV = credibility intervals for rc; OA = organizational attachment.
46
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlights
This study examined the effects of organizational attachment on
PT
health. Meta-analyses were used to examine the overall relationship.
Psychological attachment was positively (.38) related to health
SC
RI
across 401 studies.
Some types of attachment affected health outcomes more strongly.
The results suggest that feeling attached contributes to greater
AC
CE
PT E
D
employee health.
MA
NU
47