Moderating effect of POS on the participation relationship at individual, HR, and strategic levels versus psychological contract breach
| Independent variable | Direction of relations | Dependent variable | β (a) | β (b) | t (a−b) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PF | → | PCB | −0.22 | 0.26 | 4.16 | <0.001 |
| IP | → | PCB | −0,19 | 0.26 | 3.16 | <0.001 |
| HRP | → | PCB | −0.35 | 0.21 | 3.20 | <0.001 |
| SP | → | PCB | −0.16 | 0.37 | 3.18 | <0.001 |
| Independent variable | Direction of relations | Dependent variable | t (a−b) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PF | → | PCB | −0.22 | 0.26 | 4.16 | <0.001 |
| IP | → | PCB | −0,19 | 0.26 | 3.16 | <0.001 |
| HRP | → | PCB | −0.35 | 0.21 | 3.20 | <0.001 |
| SP | → | PCB | −0.16 | 0.37 | 3.18 | <0.001 |
Note(s): t = Student’s t-test statistic; p = statistical significance; β = standardized regression coefficient; a = low POS; b = high POS
Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.