1. Perceived Organizational Support
Reciprocation of
Perceived Organizational Support
量化研究方法與應用
沈芯菱、李杭、黃慧珠、吳國偉、董建華
1st Nov, 2016

2. Outline Introduction Method Result Discussion Author Hypothesis
Sample and Procedure
Result
Mediation
Moderation
Discussion
Key Findings
Limitations
Conclusion

3. Email：reisenberger2@uh.edu Phone: (713) 743-3159
Author
Robert Eisenberger
Professor in the Psychology Department
and in the Bauer School of Business
at the University of Houston
1986〈Perceived Organizational Support〉
1987〈Reciprocation ideology 〉
1990〈POS and employee diligence, commitment, and
innovation〉
1997〈POS, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction 〉
1998〈POS and police performance: The moderating
influence of socioemotional needs 〉
1999〈POS: Inferior-versus-superior performance by wary
employees 〉
2001〈Reciprocation of Perceived Organizational Support〉
Phone: (713)

4. Background Reciprocation of Perceived Organizational Support
(Cited by 1839)
Social Exchange Theory
Reciprocity norm : Meeting obligations
Organizational support theory
“The POS strengthens affective commitment and performance by a reciprocation process.”
→How? What’s the process?

5. Hypothesis
Affective
Commitment
Exchange
Ideology
Organizational
Spontaneity
Felt Obligation
Moderation H3 H1 H2
Mediation
In-role
Perform.
POS
Positive Mood H4
Mediation
Withdrawal
Behavior
H1: POS will be positively related to employees’ felt obligation to care about the organization’s welfare and to help the organization reach its objectives.
H2: The relationship between POS and felt obligation will increase with the strength of employee exchange ideology
H3: Employees’ felt obligation to care about and aid the organization will mediate the relationship of POS with affective organizational commitment, organizational spontaneity, in-role performance, and withdrawal behavior.
H4: Positive mood will mediate the relationships of POS with affective organizational commitment and organizational spontaneity. H1 H2 H3 H4

6. Method

7. Method
Sample and Procedure

8. Method Sample and Procedure
Trust Building up :Confidence notion to participants
Social security # (pair responses 2/ supervisory evaluation)
Target::430/450(92%)employees complete questionnaires
78% involve processing and handling mail directly
12% support staff
10% supervisors
Gender:60%:40%= male:female
Average Tenure= 10.8 years(SD=7.16)
within1 week after employees completion survey (Me=9.8)
Supervisors rate employees
In-role performance organizational spontaneity
Withdrawal behaviors

9. Method Sample and Procedure
Trust Building up :Confidence notion to participants
Social security # (pair responses 2/ supervisory evaluation)
Target:
Position:430/450(92%)employees complete questionnaires
78% involve processing and handling mail directly
12% support staff
10% supervisors
Gender:60%:40%= male:female
Average Tenure= 10.8 years(SD=7.16)
within1 week after employees completion survey (Me=9.8)
Supervisors rate employees
In-role performance
organizational spontaneity
Withdrawal behaviors

10. Measure (N=413) 6.Performance Measurement 7-point Likert-Type Scale
All loadings are sandartized
1.Perceived Organizational Support (POS)
X6 items (#1-#6, w/1R)
Eisenberger et. al , 1986 (w/reliability and validity)
2.Fell Obligation
X7 items (#7-#13, w/1R)
Measure employee’s felt obligation on organization
3.Employee exchange ideology
X8 items (#14-#21, w/2R)
Eisenberger et al, new items (reciprocity)
4.Affective organizational commitment
X 5 items (#22-#27)
Meyer and Allen’s Affective Commitment Scale + 1 (organizational Commitment Questionnaire)
5.Positive Mood
Rate from 1-5 (1=very little)
X2 items (#28-#29)
Burke, Brief, George, Roberson, and Webster (1989)
6.Performance Measurement
Supervisors evaluated worker w/5 points-scale (1=extremely characteristic)
X12 items(#30-#41)
X4 items~ in-role-job behaviors
X4 items~ organizational spontaneous behaviors
X4 items~ withdraw behaviors (w/all R)
R=item reverse

11. Results

12. Bird view Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables
Major variables
Variables
Results
Control variables
2. Mediation
Fully mediated model
Paths
1. Modelling
Partially mediated model
3. Moderation
Discriminant validity of the constructs
Centralization & Interaction
Main effects partialing
Standard HMR analysis
Factor correlations
Simple effects test

13. Remind: Model based on theories
Exchange ideology
Affective commitment
Felt obligation
Org. spontaneity
POS
In-role performance
Positive mood
Withdraw behavior

14. Modelling Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables
Major variables
Variables
Results
Control variables
2. Mediation
Fully mediated model
Paths
1. Modelling
Partially mediated model
3. Moderation
Discriminant validity of the constructs
Centralization & Interaction
Main effects partialing
Standard HMR analysis
Factor correlations
Simple effects test

15. Discriminant validity of the constructs-1/2
Exchange ideology
Affective commitment
Felt obligation
Org. spontaneity
POS
In-role performance
Positive mood
Withdraw behavior

16. Discriminant validity of the constructs-2/2
Absolute fitness
Incremental fitness
> 0.9
> 0.9
0.05~0.08

17. Modelling Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables
Major variables
Variables
Results
Control variables
2. Mediation
Fully mediated model
Paths
1. Modelling
Partially mediated model
3. Moderation
Discriminant validity of the constructs
Centralization & Interaction
Main effects partialing
Standard HMR analysis
Factor correlations
Simple effects test

18. Model based on theories with “Tenure”
Exchange ideology
Affective commitment
Felt obligation
Org. spontaneity
POS
In-role performance
Positive mood
Withdraw behavior

19. Latent factor correlations-1/2
Tenure
Exchange ideology
Affective commitment
Felt obligation
Org. spontaneity
POS
In-role performance
Positive mood
Withdraw behavior

20. Latent factor correlations 2/2
4 conditions (Kenny et al. 1998)
Initial variable should be related the criterion variables
Initial variable should be related to mediators
Mediators should be related to the outcome variables
Mediators may reduce the influence among initial variable and outcomes

21. Latent factor correlations-1/2
Tenure
Exchange ideology
Affective commitment
Felt obligation
Org. spontaneity
POS
In-role performance
Positive mood
Withdraw behavior

22. Mediation Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables
Major variables
Variables
Results
Control variables
2. Mediation
Fully mediated model
Paths
1. Modelling
Partially mediated model
3. Moderation
Discriminant validity of the constructs
Centralization & Interaction
Main effects partialing
Standard HMR analysis
Factor correlations
Simple effects test

23. Fully mediated model POS Tenure Exchange ideology Affective commitment
Felt obligation
Org. spontaneity
POS
In-role performance
Positive mood
Withdraw behavior

24. Partially mediated model
Tenure
Exchange ideology
Affective commitment
Felt obligation
Org. spontaneity
POS
In-role performance
Positive mood
Withdraw behavior
Fit better than the fully mediated model, according to the change in Chi-square

25. The result of models comparison 1/2
.39*
Tenure
Exchange ideology
68.6%
Affective commitment
59.2%
.45*
Felt obligation
.18*
5.2%
.26*
Org. spontaneity
.38*
POS
8.5%
In-role performance
.35*
.23*
Positive mood
.12*
-.11
12.5%
36.6%
Withdraw behavior
-.12*

26. Mediator test 1/2 4 conditions (Kenny et al. 1998)
Initial variable should be related the criterion variables
Initial variable should be related to mediators
Mediators should be related to the outcome variables
Mediators may reduce the influence among initial variable and outcomes
Unstandardized path coefficients among POS and Mediators 
Unstandardized path coefficients among Mediators and Performance variables,
respectively

27. Mediator test 2/2 POS 68.6% 59.2% 5.2% 8.5% 12.5% 36.6% .39* Tenure
Exchange ideology
68.6%
Affective commitment
59.2%
.45*
Felt obligation
.18*
5.2%
.26*
Org. spontaneity
.38*
POS
8.5%
In-role performance
.35*
.23*
Positive mood
.12*
-.11
12.5%
36.6%
Withdraw behavior
-.12*

28. Moderation Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables
Major variables
Variables
Results
Control variables
2. Mediation
Fully mediated model
Paths
1. Modelling
Partially mediated model
3. Moderation
Discriminant validity of the constructs
Centralization & Interaction
Main effects partialing
Standard HMR analysis
Factor correlations
Simple effects test

29. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Major variables
Variables
Results
Control variables
2. Mediation
Fully mediated model
Paths
1. Modelling
Partially mediated model
3. Moderation
Discriminant validity of the constructs
Centralization & Interaction
Main effects partialing
Standard HMR analysis
Factor correlations
Simple effects test

30. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Exchange Ideology H2
Felt Obligation
POS
H2 : The relationship between POS and felt obligation will increase with the strength of employee exchange ideology.
Steps：
Centralization & Intersection
Main effects partialing
Standard HMR analysis
Simple effect tests

31. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Exchange Ideology H2
Felt Obligation
POS
Step 1： Centralization & Intersection.
1a) For preventing the issues of Multi-Collinearity, high correlation between the predictor variable and the interaction item, author calculated the average of each POS & Felt Obligation, then make deductions from each value (Centralization).

32. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Exchange Ideology H2
Felt Obligation
POS
Step 1： Centralization & Intersection.
1b) Create the Product term interaction.
Product term interaction (Scale Score)
＝ POS * Exchange Ideology

33. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Exchange Ideology H2
Felt Obligation
POS
Step 2： Main effects partialing.
2a) Partialing out (分解) the main effects of POS and Employee Exchange Ideology on Felt Obligation.
2b) Enter the product terms and the control variable (Tenure年資) into the equation.

34. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis

35. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Exchange Ideology H2
Felt Obligation
POS
Step 3： Standard HMR analysis.
3a) Execute Standard Hierarchical moderated regression analysis.
3b) Analyze the results.

36. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Exchange Ideology H2
Felt Obligation
POS
Step 3： Standard HMR analysis.
3b) Analyze the results.
(I) Tenure and the main effects of POS & Employee Exchange Ideology accounted for 46.5% of the variance in Felt Obligation.

37. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Step 3： Standard HMR analysis.
3b) Analyze the results.
(II) Both POS (β=.34, p<.01)
and Employee Exchange Ideology (β=-.49, p<.01)
were significant unique predictors.
(III) The addition of the interaction
(POS X Employee Exchange Ideology ) had the predicted reliable effect (β=.12, p<.01).
Consistent with Hypothesis H2

38. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis

39. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
The relationship between POS & Felt Obligation was
greater for high-exchange ideology employees
compared to those low in exchange ideology.

40. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Exchange Ideology H2
Felt Obligation
POS

41. Result – Moderating Effects Analysis
Step 4： Simple effects tests. (T-test, df = N-4 =409)
4b/4c) Run additional Simple effects test 2
at low and high levels of POS (1 and 7, respectively)
to examine data.

42. Finding
& Conclusion

43. Key Findings POS Exchange ideology Affective Commitment
Felt obligation
Positive mood
Affective Commitment
Org. Spontaneity
In-role Perform.
Withdrawal Behavior
Exchange ideology

44. Key Findings
POS was positively related to employees’ felt obligation to care about the organization’s welfare and to help the organization reach its objectives.
Exchange ideology
Affective Commitment
Felt obligation
Org. Spontaneity
POS
In-role Perform.
Positive mood
Withdrawal Behavior

45. Key Findings
The relationship between POS and felt obligation increased with employees’ acceptance of the reciprocity norm as applied to work organizations.
Exchange ideology
Affective Commitment
Felt obligation
Org. Spontaneity
POS
In-role Perform.
Positive mood
Withdrawal Behavior

46. Key Findings
Felt obligation mediated the associations of POS with affective commitment, organizational spontaneity, and in-role performance.
Exchange ideology
Affective Commitment
Felt obligation
Org. Spontaneity
POS
In-role Perform.
Positive mood
Withdrawal Behavior

47. Key Findings
Positive mood independently mediated the relationships of POS with affective commitment and organizational spontaneity.
Exchange ideology
Affective Commitment
Felt obligation
Org. Spontaneity
POS
In-role Perform.
Positive mood
Withdrawal Behavior

48. Key Findings
POS
Felt obligation
Positive mood
Affective Commitment
Org. Spontaneity
In-role Perform.
Withdrawal Behavior
Exchange ideology
These findings support social exchange interpretations of employee-employer relationships that emphasize reciprocity-based obligations.

49. POS, Felt Obligation, and Positive Mood
Repeated favorable treatment received from the organization increases employees’ felt obligation to continue their employment and to help the organization achieve its goals (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Rousseau & McLean Parks, 1993; Robinson & Wolf Morrison, 1995; Rousseau, 1995; Ko et al, 1997).
Employees’ perception of the organization’s commitment to them (POS) contributes to a general obligation, based on the reciprocity norm, to care about their organization and to contribute to organizational objectives (Eisenberg et al, 2001).

50. POS, Exchange Ideology, and Felt Obligation
When POS was low: Workers with a strong exchange ideology expressed much less obligation than workers with a weak exchange ideology.
When POS was high: Workers with a strong exchange ideology expressed approximately the same level of felt obligation as workers with a weak exchange ideology.

51. POS-affective commitment & POS-withdraw behavior
Withdrawal Behavior
POS’s fulfillment of esteem and affiliation needs may increase employees’ incorporation of organizational membership and role status into their social identity.
Social identification has been considered an important part of affective commitment (N.J. Allen & Meyer, 1996; Mowday et al, 1979).
Future research might examine the role of social identification in the associations of POS with affective commitment and withdraw behavior.

52. Limitations
Findings that felt obligation and positive mood were associated with spontaneity might be amplified by distinguishing different kinds of spontaneity across more diverse samples.
The causal direction of the observed relationships: Rewards for superior performance might lead workers to feel greater obligation; based on feeling obligation to the organization, workers may conclude that the organization values their contributions and holds them in high regard (POS).
Rewards for
Performance
Felt obligation
POS

53. Conclusion
The present findings support social exchange interpretations that stress reciprocation’s role in employee-employer relationships.
Employees’ responsiveness to the reciprocity norm provides a basis for understanding how the favorableness and perceived intentionality of treatment received from the organization influence affective commitment and performance and why employees differ in their reciprocation of favorable treatment.
POS contributes to employees’ felt obligation to care about the organization‘s welfare and to act in the organization’s behalf, which, in turn, enhances affective organizational commitment, organizational spontaneity, and in-role performance.

54. Thank you for listening

55. Perceived Organizational Support
Reciprocation of
Perceived Organizational Support
量化研究方法與應用
沈芯菱、李杭、黃慧珠、吳國偉、董建華
1st Nov, 2016