ABSTRACT
Little empirical work has focused on individual difference inuences on workplace commitments, and it has focused almost exclusively on organizational commitment. Recent meta-analyses (Cooper-Hakim & Viswesvaran, 2005; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002; Riketta, 2002; Riketta & Van Dick, 2005) summarized empirical evidence regarding organizational commitment, yet few individual difference variables beyond simple demographics have been included, suggesting that they have not been studied frequently in the primary literature-an issue not lost on the meta-analysts (Meyer et al., 2002). This is not to suggest that individual differences have been ignored in the commitment literature. A handful of studies have examined the ve-factor model and organizational commitment (Erdheim, Wang, & Zickar, 2006; Naquin & Holton, 2002). Lee, Ashford, Walsh, and Mowday (1992) were interested in a traitlike “commitment propensity.” Hochwarter, Perrewé, Ferris, and Guercio (1999) suggested that if there is a commitment propensity, it might look something like conscientiousness. Some attention has been given to positive affectivity/negative affectivity (Thoresen, Kaplan, Barsky, Warren, & de Chermon, 2003). Self-efcacy is occasionally studied, although it is not clear whether it is an antecedent, a correlate, or an outcome of commitment (Judge, Thoresen, Pucik, & Welbourne, 1999; Sue-Chan & Ong, 2002; Whyte, Saks, & Hook, 1997). Relational demographics have also received some attention (Bacharach & Bamberger, 2004; Iverson & Buttigieg, 1997; Iverson & Kuruvilla, 1995). Finally, Wasti (2003a, 2003b) has developed a program of research on idiocentrism/allocentrism.
