This study presents a new approach to assessing commitment reflecting the Klein, Molloy, and Brinsfield (2012) reconceptualization. Klein et al. recast the construct to address issues hindering commitment scholarship, but their claims cannot be tested with existing measures. This paper presents a 4-item measure consistent with the Klein et al. conceptual definition, a measure intended to be unidimensional and applicable across all workplace targets. Our purpose is to present the development of and provide initial validity evidence for this new commitment measure and to compare it to existing alternative measures. Hypotheses around these objectives were tested with data gathered across 5 samples yielding 2,487 participants representing a wide range of jobs, organizations, and industries. Each sample examined a unique set of variables and targets that together provide a comprehensive test of this new measure relative to 8 different targets, several constructs within the nomological network, and 4 prior commitment measures. Results support our hypotheses regarding (a) the measure's properties and structure, (b) convergence and divergence with prior measures of commitment and other constructs in the nomological network, and (c) advantages over prior measures. These findings support the validity of this new approach to assessing commitment, laying the foundation for future research to address critiques of the commitment construct; better examine the multiple commitments individuals simultaneously hold; and bring consistency, synergy, and integration to commitment scholarship across workplace targets. The conceptual, methodological, and practical benefits of the measure are discussed, along with study limitations and future research opportunities.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2026.
All research outputs
#9,714,314
of 30,143,106 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Psychology
#1,792
of 3,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,661
of 337,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Psychology
#20
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,143,106 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,600 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,417 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
