↓ Skip to main content

Modeling Psychological Contract Violation using Dual Regime Models: An Event-based Approach

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Modeling Psychological Contract Violation using Dual Regime Models: An Event-based Approach
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01948
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joeri Hofmans

Abstract

A good understanding of the dynamics of psychological contract violation requires theories, research methods and statistical models that explicitly recognize that violation feelings follow from an event that violates one's acceptance limits, after which interpretative processes are set into motion, determining the intensity of these violation feelings. Whereas theories-in the form of the dynamic model of the psychological contract-and research methods-in the form of daily diary research and experience sampling research-are available by now, the statistical tools to model such a two-stage process are still lacking. The aim of the present paper is to fill this gap in the literature by introducing two statistical models-the Zero-Inflated model and the Hurdle model-that closely mimic the theoretical process underlying the elicitation violation feelings via two model components: a binary distribution that models whether violation has occurred or not, and a count distribution that models how severe the negative impact is. Moreover, covariates can be included for both model components separately, which yields insight into their unique and shared antecedents. By doing this, the present paper offers a methodological-substantive synergy, showing how sophisticated methodology can be used to examine an important substantive issue.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Student > Master 3 13%
Professor 3 13%
Lecturer 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 4 17%
Psychology 3 13%
Social Sciences 3 13%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 August 2022.
All research outputs
#14,988,291
of 23,056,273 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,319
of 30,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,356
of 331,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#427
of 620 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,056,273 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,375 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 331,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 620 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.