방법 비교

	Role Conflict and Ambiguity Scale	Psychological Contract Measurement
분야	조직행동론	조직행동론
계열	Latent structure	Latent structure
기원 연도	1970	1989
창시자	John Rizzo, Robert House & Sidney Lirtzman; Robert Kahn et al.	Denise Rousseau; Sandra Robinson & Elizabeth Morrison
유형	Role-stress measurement scale	Employment-exchange belief measurement scale
원전	Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150-163.	Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2), 121-139.
별칭	Rizzo-House-Lirtzman Scale, RCA Scale, Role Stress Scale, Role Conflict Role Ambiguity Measure	Psychological Contract Inventory, PCI, Psychological Contract Breach Measure, Rousseau Psychological Contract
관련	3	3
요약	The Role Conflict and Ambiguity Scale measures two of the most studied sources of stress at work: receiving incompatible demands (role conflict) and not knowing clearly what is expected of you (role ambiguity). The theoretical foundation comes from Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, and Rosenthal's 1964 landmark study Organizational Stress, which framed the workplace as a system of role senders whose expectations shape the focal person's experience. Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman turned this theory into a practical instrument in their 1970 Administrative Science Quarterly paper, developing self-report scales for role conflict and role ambiguity that became the field's standard measure. The two constructs are kept distinct: conflict is about contradictory expectations, ambiguity about missing or unclear ones. The scales link role stress to tension, dissatisfaction, and impaired performance, and remain central to occupational-stress and role-theory research.	The psychological contract is an employee's set of beliefs about the reciprocal obligations between themselves and their employer — the unwritten promises that go beyond the formal employment agreement. Denise Rousseau revived and reframed the concept in her 1989 paper, defining it as the individual's perception of mutual exchange terms, and her 1990 study of new hires distinguished transactional obligations (pay for performance, narrow and economic) from relational ones (loyalty and support, broad and open-ended). Measuring the psychological contract means assessing what employees believe each side has promised and whether those promises are kept. Robinson and Morrison's 2000 longitudinal study sharpened the measurement of breach — the perception that the employer has failed to fulfill obligations — and its emotional aftermath, violation. These measures explain why unmet expectations erode trust, satisfaction, citizenship behavior, and retention.