Compară metode

	Psychological Contract Measurement	Role Conflict and Ambiguity Scale
Domeniu	Comportament organizațional	Comportament organizațional
Familie	Latent structure	Latent structure
Anul apariției	1989	1970
Autorul original	Denise Rousseau; Sandra Robinson & Elizabeth Morrison	John Rizzo, Robert House & Sidney Lirtzman; Robert Kahn et al.
Tip	Employment-exchange belief measurement scale	Role-stress measurement scale
Sursa seminală	Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2), 121-139.	Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150-163.
Denumiri alternative	Psychological Contract Inventory, PCI, Psychological Contract Breach Measure, Rousseau Psychological Contract	Rizzo-House-Lirtzman Scale, RCA Scale, Role Stress Scale, Role Conflict Role Ambiguity Measure
Înrudite	3	3
Rezumat	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.	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.