Commitment in an Israeli Kibbutz

Antonovsky, Helen; Antonovsky, Aaron

doi:10.1177/001872677402700308

Cited by 24 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…True to his interdisciplinary and multidimensional thinking, Antonovsky viewed the psychosocial realm also in terms of a continuum; for instance, in his study of kibbutz residents in Israel, he expounded the commitment $ alienation continuum as a predictor of success in adjustment and well-being (Antonovsky & Antonovsky, 1974). Individual sense of coherence mattered less in the communal context of the kibbutz, where shared GRR protected the collective, and again individuals might find themselves at different points along the commitment $ alienation continuum, rather than at one or the other end, while living in the kibbutz (Sagy & Antonovsky, 1990).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Hope” Makes Sense in Eritrean Sense of Coherence, but “Loser” Does Not

Almedom

Tesfamichael

Mohammed

et al. 2005

Journal of Loss and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Hope” Makes Sense in Eritrean Sense of Coherence, but “Loser” Does Not

Almedom

Tesfamichael

Mohammed

et al. 2005

Journal of Loss and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Thus positive relationships have been found between commitment and membership in informal cliques (Becker, 1960), overall patterns of participation (Antonovsky & Antonovsky, 1974), and group attitudes toward the organization (Buchanan, 1974;Patchen, 1970). A lack of integration seems to be associated with the development of negative attitudes toward the organization (McLaughlin & Cheatam, 1977).…”

Section: Commitmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social integration, a concept intimately related to communication networks, has been found to be an antecedent to organizational commitment, especially in relation to a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization (Buchanan, 1974;Lodahl, 1964). Thus positive relationships have been found between commitment and membership in informal cliques (Becker, 1960), overall patterns of participation (Antonovsky & Antonovsky, 1974), and group attitudes toward the organization (Buchanan, 1974;Patchen, 1970). A lack of integration seems to be associated with the development of negative attitudes toward the organization (McLaughlin & Cheatam, 1977).…”

Section: Commitmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Contagion and Multiplexity Communication Networks as Predictors of Commitment and Role Ambiguity

Hartman¹,

Johnson²

1989

Human Comm Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research compares two contrasting perspectives of social contagion processes associated with the organizational outcome variables of commitment and role ambiguity in organizations. The two perspectives are structural equivalence (which focuses on the positions of individuals in social networks) and cohesion (which focuses on an individual's direct communication contacts). It was hypothesized that structural equivalence would be more associated with role ambiguity and that commitment would be more associated with cohesion. The relationship between these variables and multiplex content networks was also studied. It was hypothesized that commitment was a much more broadly based concept in the sense that a number offunctionalcontent networks systematically relate to it. On the other hand, role ambiguity was hypothesized to be more closely associated with uniplex networks, especially those related to job duties and organizational goals. While there were exceptions, generally the research results supported the hypotheses relating to multiplexity. The hypotheses that structural equivalence was more associated with role ambiguity and that commitment was more associated with cohesion also were supported in this research.

show abstract

“…Positive relationships have been empirically identified, however, between several aspects of network involvement and organizational commitment. ( 1) amount of feedback received on the job (Morris & Steers, 1980;Steers, 1977); (2) the overall pattern of participation (Antonovsky & Antonovsky, 1974;Brown, 1969;Sheldon, 1971); (3) membership in informal cliques (Becker, 1960); (4) group attitudes toward the organization (Buchanan, 1974;Patchen, 1970); and ( 5 ) participation in decision making (Hall, 1977).…”

Section: Communication Network Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Involvement in Communication Networks as a Predictor of Organizational Commitment

1983

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the relationship between involvement in a job-related communication net work and organizational commitment. The findings indicate a complex relationship that is moderated by the degree of job involvement. For employees who are not involved in their jobs, involvement in the job-related communication network functions to foster commitment to the organization. Two major conclusions are drawn: (I) the impact of involvement in communication networks on employee attitudes and behaviors may occur only for individuals with certain characteristics; and (2)previous studies that have reported main effects for individual variables on organizational commitment may need reinterpretation in light of the disordinal interaction obtained here. The possibility that different commitment processes operate for different kinds of employees is explored, with special emphasis on those employees for whom communication is apotent factor in determining attitudes. Implications for future research on the relationship between communication network involvement and other employee responses are discussed. In their comprehensive assessment of the organizational communication literature, Porter and Roberts ( 1976) assert that "conspicuously missing in almost all of the research we have examined are data concerning relationships between communication patterns and behaviors and other organizational phenomena" (p. 1584). The current article is one of several recent efforts designed to correct this deficiency in the research literature. In it, we examine the relationship between communication network involvement and organizational commitment. To accomplish this task, we begin with an analysis of the literature pertaining to both Eric M. Eisenberg is an assistant professor of speech at Temple University. Peter R. Monge is a professor of communication at the Annenberg School ofCommunications, University o f Southern California. Katherine 1. Miller is a doctoral candidate at the

show abstract

Commitment in an Israeli Kibbutz

Cited by 24 publications

References 3 publications

“Hope” Makes Sense in Eritrean Sense of Coherence, but “Loser” Does Not

“Hope” Makes Sense in Eritrean Sense of Coherence, but “Loser” Does Not

Social Contagion and Multiplexity Communication Networks as Predictors of Commitment and Role Ambiguity

Involvement in Communication Networks as a Predictor of Organizational Commitment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About