IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i23p15527-d981423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychological Contract Breach and Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Reviews

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriela Topa

    (Faculty of Psychology, UNED—Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, 28040 Madrid, Spain
    Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago 7500912, Chile)

  • Mercedes Aranda-Carmena

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Psychology, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, 28933 Madrid, Spain)

  • Berta De-Maria

    (Faculty of Psychology, UNED—Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

A psychological contract is a set of individual beliefs that a person has about the reciprocal obligations and benefits established in an exchange relationship, such as an employment relationship in an organizational setting. A psychological contract breach is a subjective experience referred to the perception of one of the parties that the other has failed to adequately fulfill its obligations and promises. Breaches have been systematically connected to employees’ attitudes and behaviors that hamper the employment relationship. Despite its apparent clarity, some relevant topics about psychological contract breach, psychological contract fulfillment and the relationships with their consequences still remain unclear. The main objective of this review of reviews is to conduct a review of reviews on psychological contract breaches, considering both systematic reviews and metanalytical papers with the purpose of synthesizing the evidence to date under the psychological contract theory. Using the SPIDER tool, our systematic review of reviews focuses on: (a) Sample; (b) Phenomenon of Interest; (c) Design; (d) Evaluation; and (e) Research type. Finally, only eight systematic reviews and meta-analyses met the inclusion criteria. Of the eight reviews included, seven were meta-analyses while the other was a systematic quantitative review. This study describes the available empirical research on psychological contract breaches and fulfillment and summarizes the meta-analytical evidence on their relationships with attitudinal and behavioral outcomes, as well as the role of potential moderator variables. Due to the methodological caveats of the reviews themselves and of the primary studies they were based on, our conclusions about the impact of psychological contract breaches on outcomes still remain tentative.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriela Topa & Mercedes Aranda-Carmena & Berta De-Maria, 2022. "Psychological Contract Breach and Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Reviews," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-22, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15527-:d:981423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15527/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15527/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gong, Baiyun & Sims, Randi L., 2023. "Psychological contract breach during the pandemic: How an abrupt transition to a work from home schedule impacted the employment relationship," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Larysa Botha & Renier Steyn, 2021. "Conceptualisation of Psychological Contract: Definitions, Typologies and Measurement," Journal of Social Science Studies, Macrothink Institute, vol. 8(2), pages 1-1, December.
    3. Elizabeth Kassab Sfeir, 2022. "Impact of interpersonal influences on Employee engagement and Psychological contract: Effects of guanxi, wasta, jeitinho, blat and pulling strings," Papers 2209.05592, arXiv.org.
    4. John Rodwell & Dianne Johnson, 2022. "The State of the Psychological Contract, Justice and Engagement Drive Nurses’ Performance Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-11, October.
    5. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Folke, Filippa & Melin, Marika, 2024. "Ramp-up in the air: Impairing or repairing aviation crews’ working conditions? A mixed-methods survey study on working conditions, health, and safety among cabin crew and pilots in Europe," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lutz Bornmann & Robin Haunschild & Sven E. Hug, 2018. "Visualizing the context of citations referencing papers published by Eugene Garfield: a new type of keyword co-occurrence analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 427-437, February.
    2. Akinpelu, O.A. & Olaleye, O. & Fagbola, O., 2023. "The Soil Organic Matter Decomposers: A Bibliometric Analysis," International Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Research, Malwa International Journals Publication, vol. 9(4), August.
    3. Muhammad Farooq Islam & Ozge Can, 2024. "Integrating digital and sustainable entrepreneurship through business models: a bibliometric analysis," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    5. J. Gómez-Verjan & I. Gonzalez-Sanchez & E. Estrella-Parra & R. Reyes-Chilpa, 2015. "Trends in the chemical and pharmacological research on the tropical trees Calophyllum brasiliense and Calophyllum inophyllum, a global context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 1019-1030, November.
    6. Luis Araya-Castillo & Felipe Hernández-Perlines & Hugo Moraga & Antonio Ariza-Montes, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Research on Socioemotional Wealth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-26, March.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Dieter Franz Kogler & Bowen Yan, 2017. "Mapping patent classifications: portfolio and statistical analysis, and the comparison of strengths and weaknesses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1573-1591, September.
    8. Filippo Corsini & Rafael Laurenti & Franziska Meinherz & Francesco Paolo Appio & Luca Mora, 2019. "The Advent of Practice Theories in Research on Sustainable Consumption: Past, Current and Future Directions of the Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Tuba Bircan & Almila Alkim Akdag Salah, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the Use of Artificial Intelligence Technologies for Social Sciences," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(23), pages 1-17, November.
    10. Kumari, Rajni & Kumar, Manish & Vivekanand, V. & Pareek, Nidhi, 2023. "Chitin biorefinery: A narrative and prophecy of crustacean shell waste sustainable transformation into bioactives and renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Luis Puente-Díaz & Doina Solís & Siu-heng Wong-Toro, 2024. "Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis on High Hydrostatic Pressure as New Sustainable Technology for Food Processing: Key Concepts and Research Trends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-18, December.
    12. Fatih Albayrak & Oğuz Poyrazoğlu, 2024. "A Systematic Literature Review on Lean, Industry 4.0, and Digital Factory," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 13486-13508, September.
    13. Migliavacca, Milena & Goodell, John W. & Paltrinieri, Andrea, 2023. "A bibliometric review of portfolio diversification literature," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    14. Zhengyao Liu & Jing Huang & Yonghong Li & Xiaokang Liu & Fei Qiang & Yiping He, 2025. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Geological Hazards Monitoring Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, January.
    15. Dilvin Cebi & Melih Soner Celiktas & Hasan Sarptas, 2022. "A Review on Sewage Sludge Valorization via Hydrothermal Carbonization and Applications for Circular Economy," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 1345-1367, December.
    16. Muthukumar Perumal & Selvam Sekar & Paula C. S. Carvalho, 2024. "Global Investigations of Seawater Intrusion (SWI) in Coastal Groundwaters in the Last Two Decades (2000–2020): A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-28, February.
    17. Massimiliano M. Pellegrini & Riccardo Rialti & Giacomo Marzi & Andrea Caputo, 2020. "Sport entrepreneurship: A synthesis of existing literature and future perspectives," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 795-826, September.
    18. David Vérez & Luisa F. Cabeza, 2021. "Which Building Services Are Considered to Have Impact on Climate Change?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-16, June.
    19. María Pinto & Rosaura Fernández-Pascual & David Caballero-Mariscal & Dora Sales, 2020. "Information literacy trends in higher education (2006–2019): visualizing the emerging field of mobile information literacy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1479-1510, August.
    20. Francesco Ciampi & Alessandro Giannozzi & Giacomo Marzi & Edward I. Altman, 2021. "Rethinking SME default prediction: a systematic literature review and future perspectives," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2141-2188, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15527-:d:981423. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.