Content area
Full Text
When people react to their experiences with particular authorities, those authorities and the organizations or institutions that they represent often benefit if the people involved begin with high levels of commitment to the organization or institution represented by the authorities. Studies have identified two types of benefit. First, in his studies of people's attitudes toward political and legal institutions, Tyler found that attitudes after an experience with the institution were strongly affected by prior attitudes (Tyler, Casper, and Fisher, 1989), single experiences influence post-experience loyalty but certainly do not overwhelm the relationship between pre-experience and post-experience loyalty. Thus, the best predictor of loyalty after an experience is usually loyalty before that experience. Second, people with prior loyalty to the organization or institution judge their dealings with the organization's or institution's authorities to be fairer than do those with less prior loyalty, either because they are more fairly treated or because they interpret equivalent treatment as fairer (Tyler, 1990).
Although high levels of prior organizational or institutional commitment are generally beneficial to the organization or institution (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990), under certain conditions high levels of prior commitment may actually sow the seeds of reduced commitment. When previously committed individuals feel that they were treated unfavorably or unfairly during some experience with the organization or institution, they may show an especially sharp decline in commitment. The present studies were designed to test this hypothesis, which, if confirmed, would suggest that organizational or institutional commitment has risks, as well as benefits.
At least three psychological models offer predictions of how individuals' reactions (e.g., change in their organizational or institutional commitment) may vary as a function of (1) their prior level of commitment and (2) the favorability of the encounter with the organization or institution. Favorability of the encounter is determined by the outcome of the encounter and the fairness or appropriateness of the procedures used to allocate outcomes during the encounter. First, the instrumental prediction (e.g., Thibaut and Walker, 1975) is that because people are mainly concerned with receiving desired outcomes from their encounters with organizations or institutions (e.g., pay, promotions, and favorable rulings), changes in their level of commitment will depend primarily on the favorability of the encounter. The shift in individuals' commitment will thus vary...