The effect of organizational Justice on organizational citizenship behavior through the mediating role of Organizational commitment in the Public universities in Amhara region

The effect of organizational Justice on organizational citizenship behavior through the mediating role of Organizational commitment in the Public universities in Amhara region | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The effect of organizational Justice on organizational citizenship behavior through the mediating role of Organizational commitment in the Public universities in Amhara region Shimelis Mesfin This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5941911/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of organizational justice (OJ) on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) through the mediating role of organizational commitment (OC) in the public universities in Amhara region. Explanatory mixed research design was employed. The size of the population was 2170. Of these, 620 instructors were selected as samples using a proportional stratified random sampling technique. Five interviewees took part in the qualitative part of the study. The collected data were analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative techniques. The result of one sample t-test indicated that the mean scores of OC (52.981) and OCB (71.363) were higher than the respective test values of these variables with (t = 15.398) and (t = 5.639) at p < .05, df = 619. On the contrary, the mean score of OJ (43.934) was lower than the test value with (t = -11.987, df = 619) at p < .05. The result of the structural equation modeling (SEM) indicated that there were positive and statistically significant relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB. Concerning the causal relationships, the value of R 2 indicated that OJ significantly predicted 44.3% of the variance in OC with a standardized regression coefficient of (β = .667) at p < .05, while 29.2% of the variance in OCB was significantly predicted by the joint effects of OJ and OC with standardized regression coefficients of (β = .341) and (β = .164) respectively at p < .05. Statistically significant differences were found among instructors in their perception of OJ (F = 132.833, p = .000), OC (F = 3.163, p = .024) and OCB (F = 19.071, p = .000) across the four generations of universities. Therefore, it is concluded that OJ had a significant effect on OCB through the mediation of OC. Thus, it is suggested to improve the current status of OJ, OC, and OCB in the research sites. Leadership and Ethics Organizational Commitment Organizational Citizenship Behavior Organizational Justice Public Universities Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 1. Introduction Though different factors have their own contributions to the function of organizations, organizational justice (OJ), organizational commitment (OC) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) play important roles in enhancing the success of organizations. Specifically, OJ is concerned with employees’ perception of fair treatment in the organization which is conceptualized in terms of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). Whereas OC is viewed as the desire of employees to stay in the organizations defined in terms of affective, continuance, and normative commitment which are related to each other (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Concerning OCB, it is discretionary behavior neither in the job description nor recognized in the formal reward system understood in altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue (Organ, 1988). The findings of the previous studies indicated that significant relationships are found among OJ, OC, and OCB. For instance, Karanja (2016) found that OJ had a significant effect on employees’ levels of commitment. Furthermore, studies conducted by Khan and Rashid (2012) and Crow, Lee, and Joo (2012) indicated that employees’ feeling of justice significantly influenced their OC. In the same way, Karriker and Williams (2009) found that employees' engagement in citizenship activities benefits the organizations to be effective. Other researchers found that employees’ level of engagement in citizenship activities was significantly determined by OJ (Lilly, 2015; Shin & Sohn, 2015). This means that employees who perceive fairness in the treatment of their leaders are more likely to engage in citizenship behaviors. Moreover, the findings of several studies indicated that OC had a significant effect on the OCB of employees (Alotaibi, 2001; Carmeli, 2004; Harwiki, 2013; Kwantes, 2003; Liu, 2009). This indicates that there are causal relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB. Based on the discussions made so far about OJ, OC, and OCB as well as the relationships among these variables, the researcher synthesized a new conceptual framework for this study as indicated in Figure 1. This framework considers OJ as an independent variable that affects OCB. It also explains OC as the mediating variable in the relationship between OJ and OCB. OCB is considered a dependent variable that is affected by OJ directly and indirectly. OJ, OC, and OCB are important variables linked with the effectiveness of any organization including higher education institutions. The findings of many studies indicated that employees show distrust towards the goals of the organization (Dean, Brandes, & Dharwadkar, 1998) and exhibit workplace aggression (Kennedy, Homant, & Homant, 2004) due to lack of fair treatment in the organization. These situations lead to increased turnover intention and interpersonal deviance (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001), exhibit counter-productive work behavior (Spector & Fox, 2002) and low commitment, and eventually, they may pursue to leave the organization (Aslam, Ilyas, Imran, & Rahman, 2016). These indicate that employees who are deprived of justice in the organization will be susceptible to stress and burn-out leading to low productivity. Concerning commitment, the findings of many studies indicated that a low level of commitment leads to turnover and attrition (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006), absenteeism (Farrell & Stamm, 1988), counter-productive behavior (Dalal, 2005), and decline in altruism and compliance (Schappe, 1998). A survey conducted by Bosman, Buttendach, and Laba (2008) showed that a high level of employee turnover was associated with poor function of the organization and increased costs involved in selecting and training replacements. These can cause a loss of work progress, productivity, organizational status, and poor relationships with customers (Alzubi, 2018). High turnover rates can increase the cost of recruitment, training, and retention of staff (Al-Hussami, 2008), as well as negatively affect the success of the organization in attaining strategic objectives, sustaining competitive advantage, and keeping the morale, productivity, and quality of work in the organization (Alzubi, 2018). Similarly, the shortage of professionally capable, motivated, and committed leaders is another challenge in Ethiopian universities (Mulu, 2012). OCB is another important issue that maximizes the performance of the organizations by encouraging employees to exert extra effort. Though OCB contributes to the development of employees and organizational effectiveness, it is not officially recognized by many organizations (Organ, 1988). Due to this reason, research has not been conducted on OCB in Ethiopian higher education institutions in general and in public universities in particular. Bez (2010) also believed that shortage of studies related to OCB undermines the contribution of employees in the organizations. Discrimination, organizational injustice, and habituation are considered as the major factors that discourage employees from engaging in OCB (Zhang, 2011). This will not only lead to a decrease in the participation of employees in OCB but also enable them to engage in counterproductive behavior such as theft and absenteeism (Marcus & Schuler, 2004). This suggests that organizations will be effective if employees are willing to be involved in OCB. Although several studies have been done on OJ, OC, and OCB in various organizations, sufficient studies have not been conducted on the effect of OJ on OCB in the context of higher education institutions. Despite limited studies have been done on the direct causal relationship between OJ and OCB (Chahal & Mehta, 2011; Iqbal, Aziz, & Tasawar, 2012; Shin & Sohn, 2015; Spector & Che, 2014), a study has not been conducted on the indirect effect of OJ on OCB through the mediation of OC in the context of Ethiopian public universities in general and in the public universities of Amhara region in particular. As a result, this study examined the effect of OJ on OCB through the mediating role of OC in the public universities in Amhara region. 2. Research Questions 1. What is the perception of instructors towards OJ, OC, and OCB in the public universities in Amhara region? 2. What are the relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB in the public universities in Amhara region? 3. What is the effect of OJ on OC and OCB in the public universities in Amhara region? 4. What is the effect of OC on OCB in the public universities in Amhara region? 5. What is the indirect effect of OJ on OCB of mediated by OC in the public universities in Amhara region? 6. Are there significant differences among instructors in their perception of OJ, OC, and OCB in the four generations of public universities in Amhara region? 2. Research Methods 2.1 Research Design Based on the nature of the study, explanatory sequential mixed design (QUAN qual) was employed to understand the quantitative results in depth using the qualitative data. Explanatory sequential mixed design has a strong quantitative orientation in which the researcher first gathers the quantitative data analyzes the results, and then plans the qualitative phase of the study using the quantitative results (Creswell, 2014). This design will capitalize on the strengths and minimize the limitations of quantitative and qualitative research approaches (Creswell & Clark, 2007; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). A simplified illustration of explanatory sequential mixed design is shown in Figure 2. 2.2 Population, sample, and sampling techniques There are 10 public universities in Amhara region. These universities are categorized into four generations based on the year of establishment. Initially, six universities were selected out of 10 from the specified strata. That is, the University of Gondar from the 1 st generation, Wollo and Debre Markos Universities from the 2 nd generation, Debre Tabor University from the 3 rd generation, and Injibara and Debarq universities from the 4 th generation were selected using a stratified random sampling technique. These stratifications also allowed us to ensure the representation of universities from each generation and make comparisons among respondents in their perception of servant leadership, OC, and OCB. Then, 21 colleges were selected from the six universities to determine the size of the population and subpopulations of the study. Specifically, five colleges from the University of Gondar, four colleges from Wollo University, four colleges from Debre Markos University, four colleges from Debre Tabor University, two colleges from Injibara University, and two colleges from Debark University were selected using a simple random sampling technique mainly lottery method. In this regard, a total of 2170 instructors in the selected universities were taken as the population of the study. Of these; 731 from the 1 st generation, 710 from the 2 nd generation, 427 from the 3 rd generation, and 302 from the 4 th generation were considered as the subpopulations of the study. Different sampling techniques are used to determine the sample size of various studies. Item-respondent proportion requirement is highly recommended by different authorities to determine the size of the sample to undertake factor analysis. Though there is no single criterion that determines the necessary sample size, Comrey and Lee (1992) suggested that a sample size of 500 and above would be good for carrying out factor analysis. Based on the recommendations of Everitt (1975), Ho (2006), and Kline (2011), 10 respondents per each item were used as a method to determine the sample size of this study. Accordingly, the sample size of this study was 620 since the number of items under the dimensions of the latent variables in the questionnaire was 62. After determining the total sample size of the study, the sample size of each stratum was determined based on the size of their population using a proportionate stratified sampling method developed by Pandey and Verma (2008). This helps to select representative samples from each stratum with the assumption that the number of instructors in the selected strata was significantly varied. Hence, the researcher determined the sample size of each stratum by dividing the population size of the k th strata by the total population size and multiplying by the total sample size using Pandey and Verma's (2008) formula as given below. i.e. Of the total sample of 620 instructors; 209 from the 1 st generation, 203 from the 2 nd generation, 122 from the 3 rd generation, and 86 from the 4 th generation were taken into the sample using the above-given formula. This helped to avoid the misrepresentation of some members of the population in the study. These samples were selected using a simple random sampling technique. The summary of the population and sample of the study are shown in Table 1 below. Table 1: Summary of population and sample of the study Strata Name of universities Population size of each university (N k ) Sample size of each university (n k ) 1 st generation University of Gondar 731 209 Wollo University 280 80 2 nd generation Debre Markos University 430 123 3 rd generation Debre Tabor University 427 122 Injibara University 145 41 4 th generation Debark University 157 45 Total N= 2170 n= 620 With regard to the qualitative phase of the study, five department heads were included in the sample using purposive sampling techniques to collect the qualitative data through semi-structured interviews to further explain the quantitative results. 2.3 Data Gathering Instruments The researcher used a standardized questionnaire to collect the quantitative data. The questionnaire has four parts containing close-ended items. The first part dealt with respondents' characteristics related to sex, educational qualification, work experience, and universities in which they have been working. The second part of the questionnaire contains 19 items developed by Moorman (1991) and Niehoff and Moorman (1993) to assess respondents' perceived OJ in terms of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. The third part of the questionnaire measured respondents' perception of OC using 18 items organized into three dimensions – affective commitment, continual commitment, and normative commitment developed by Meyer et al. (1993). The fourth part of the questionnaire contains 25 items developed by Lee and Allen (2002) to measure respondents' OCB in universities. This scale consists of five dimensions such as altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue to fully understand the status of OCB in the universities. Finally, respondents were asked to rate items using five points of Likert-type items ranging from 1 ( not at all ) to 5 ( very great extent ) to measure, OJ, OC, and OCB in the universities. With regard to qualitative data, a semi-structured interview was conducted to assess the status of OJ, OC, and OCB in the study area. 2.4 Pilot Test A pilot test was conducted on 90 selected instructors of Bahir Dar University to assess the reliability of the questionnaire. The distribution of the sample for the pilot test followed the same procedures as in the main sample of the study. Cronbach Alpha was used to test the reliability of items. The reliability coefficients of the instrument with Cronbach Alpha (α) = (.92, .87 & .94), (.83, .82 & .88) and (.83, .85, .90, .86 & .88) for items about the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB respectively. This shows that items in the respective dimensions of latent variables with reliability coefficients > .80 were found internally consistent in measuring OJ, OC, and OCB (George & Mallery, 2010). 2.5 Data Collection Procedures Firstly, the researcher got a permission letter from Bahir Dar University to collect the data from the research sites. Based on the given permission, the list of the target respondents was accessed, and the required sample size. Respondents were provided information about the purpose of the study before they took place in the study. Participants were also informed about the absence of potential risks and benefits due to participation in the study. Then, the questionnaire was distributed to the respondents and they were given three days to complete the questionnaire. After the questionnaire was returned to the researcher and analyzed the data, a face-to-face interview was conducted with each respondent inside the compounds of the universities. 2.6 Data Analysis Techniques Both quantitative and qualitative analysis techniques were used to analyze the data. Specifically, a one-sample t-test was used to measure OJ, OC, and OCB (Research question #1). Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to assess the relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB (Research question #2). SEM was employed to analyze the effect of OJ on OC and OCB of instructors (Research question #3). The effect of OC on the OCB of instructors was analyzed using SEM (Research question #4). SEM was also used to analyze the indirect effect of OJ on the OCB of instructors mediated by OC (Research question #5). One-way ANOVA was employed to assess whether there are significant differences among instructors in their perception of OJ, OC, and OCB in the four generations of public universities in Amhara region (Research question #6). Moreover, the data collected through semi-structured interviews were analyzed qualitatively with the intent to further understand the quantitative results in depth. 3. Results and Discussion This section presents the results of the study according to the themes of the research questions. It began with testing the construct validity of the respective dimensions of latent variables and measurement model fit through conducting exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. 3.1 Factor Analyses Although there is no clear criterion to decide what is large or small, items with factor loadings ± .33 and above are considered to satisfy the minimum level of threshold based on the recommendation of Ho ( 2006 ). The result of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that 55 items in the respective dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB had high factor loadings above the cutoff point of ± .33 were retained. Specifically, the factor loading values of these items range from .628 to .914 which explained more than 50% of the variance in the constructs was maintained. However, seven items with low factor loadings were rejected from the analysis for they suppressed the reliability of the results. The result of the principal component analysis also showed that the factor loadings of OJ, OC, and OCB dimensions with eigenvalues ranging from 1.464 to 3.896 are higher than the minimum threshold of 1. Based on the results of construct validity, the researcher developed the measurement model using the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB as indicated in Fig. 3. Though there is little agreement among scholars on the type of fit indices and their thresholds, the researcher used relative chi-square (CMIN/DF), goodness fit index (GFI), adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), normed fit index (NFI), incremental fit index (IFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), comparative fit index (CFI) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) to assess the degree to which the measurement model fits the observed covariance matrix using AMOS as indicated in Table 2 . Table 2 AMOS outputs on the fitness indices against the criteria of the measurement model Criteria Obtained values Threshold Relative chi-square (CMIN/DF) 3.036 .90 Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) .942 > .90 Normed fit index (NFI) .940 > .90 Incremental fit index (IFI) .959 > .90 Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) .945 > .90 Comparative fit index (CFI) .959 > .90 Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) .047 < .05 As it has been indicated in Table 2 , the measurement model satisfied all the fit indices. That is, the results indicated that the measurement model fits the observed variance–covariance matrix by the chi-square test (CMIN/DF), χ2 (N = 620, df = 41) = 124.464, p < .05. In addition, the fit indices of GFI (.964), AGFI (.942), NFI (.940), IFI (.959), TLI (.945) and CFI (.959) were higher than the threshold of .90 and RMSEA (.047) was lower than the cutoff of point .05 with p = .000. The maximum likelihood estimates of the unstandardized repression and standardized regression weights also confirmed that all the path coefficients in the measurement model are significant at p < .05 as shown in Table 3 . Table 3 Unstandardized and standardized regression weights of the measurement model Parameters/dimensions Unstandardized Standardized Estimate S.E. C.R. P Estimate Distributive justice <--- OJ .472 .072 6.529 *** .329 Procedural justice <--- OJ .859 .082 10.535 *** .709 Interactional justice <--- OJ 1.000 .659 Affective commitment <--- OC .582 .048 12.044 *** .538 Continuance commitment <--- OC .823 .054 15.175 *** .731 Normative commitment <--- OC 1.0000 .857 Altruism <--- OCB 1.000 .653 Conscientiousness <--- OCB 1.070 .075 14.196 *** .690 Sportsmanship <--- OCB 1.088 .073 14.922 *** .737 Courtesy <--- OCB 1.172 .076 15.338 *** .766 Civic virtue <--- OCB 1.147 .076 15.095 *** .749 As shown in Table 3 , the regression weights of all the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB were significant with the critical ratio test greater than ± 1.96 at p < .05. From this, it is possible to conclude that the critical ratio tests of the 11 dimensions were extremely far from the threshold of ± 1.96 indicates a significant path at p < .05. Likewise, the standardized regression weights of all dimensions in the measurement model were significantly represented by their respective latent variables. Specifically, the standardized regression weights of the observed variables in the measurement model range from .329 (distributive justice) to .857 (normative commitment). In other words, the observed variables explained the respective latent constructs ranging from 10.8% (distributive justice) to 73.4% (normative commitment). This indicated that the observed variables were significantly represented by their respective latent variables at p < .05. Therefore, the measurement model analysis confirmed that all dimensions were internally consistent and structurally valid to measure OJ, OC, and OCB in the context of this study. 3.2 Status of Organizational justice, commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior Table 4 A one-sample t-test for the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB Dimensions Mean Std. Test value Mean difference t-value Sig.(2-tailed) Organizational justice Distributive justice 13.64 2.934 12 1.635 13.878 .000 Procedural justice 11.08 4.051 15 -3.924 -24.121 .000 Interactional justice 19.22 4.133 21 -1.777 -10.709 .000 Total 43.934 8.446 48 -4.066 -11.987 .000 Organizational commitment Affective commitment 22.80 5.281 18 4.805 22.653 .000 Continuance commitment 16.04 4.778 18 -1.956 -10.196 .000 Normative commitment 14.13 3.116 12 2.132 17.037 .000 Total 52.981 8.054 48 4.981 15.398 .000 Organizational citizenship behavior Altruism 14.16 2.756 12 2.160 19.509 .000 Conscientiousness 13.92 4.943 15 -1.082 -5.451 .000 Sportsmanship 14.07 4.509 15 − .929 -5.131 .000 Courtesy 14.50 4.800 15 − .505 -2.619 .000 Civic virtue 14.72 2.207 12 2.719 30.680 .000 Total 71.363 10.433 69 2.363 5.639 .000 N = 620, df = 619, *Sig. <.05 As indicated in Tale 4, the result of one sample t-test revealed that the mean score of distributive justice (13.64) was greater than the test value at (t = 13.878) at p < .05, df = 619. This means that instructors fairly perceived the state of distributive justice in the workplace. On the other hand, the mean scores of procedural justice (11.08) and interactional justice (19.22) were less than the respective test values at (t = -24.121) and (t = -10.709) respectively at p < .05, df = 619. Hence, the mean score of OJ (43.934) was lower than the t value (48) with (t = -11.987, df = 619) at p < .05, indicating that OJ was observed to a small extent in the respective universities. This result is quite similar to the qualitative result obtained through the interview. The finding of this study is supported by other researchers. For example, a more recent work of Wajdee, Gurvinder, and Shehadehmofleh ( 2018 ) revealed that employees had good perceptions of OJ in public universities, which is congruent with this finding. However, the findings of Cohen and Spector (2001), Spector and Fox ( 2002 ), and Vardi and Wiener ( 1996 ) indicated that employees are exposed to stress, turnover, dissatisfaction, low commitment, distrust, and violence leading to low productivity due to lack of OJ in the organizations. With regard to OC, the mean scores of affective commitment (22.80) and normative commitment (14.13) were higher than the respective test values at (t = 22.653) and (t = 17.037) at p < .05, df = 619. This implies that instructors were moderately committed to carrying out their jobs due to their emotional attachment to the universities and sense of responsibility to serve the universities. Conversely, the mean score of continuance commitment (16.04) was lower than the test value at (t = -10.196). Thus, the mean score of OC (52.981) was higher than the t value (48) with (t = 15.398, df = 619) at p < .05, indicating that instructors in the research sites were committed to some extent to performing their job. A similar result was also found in the interview. This result is supported by Jafri ( 2010 ) that academic staff had a moderate level of commitment to maintaining membership in the organization. Consistent with this result, Alemu ( 2014 ) at Adama Science and Technology University revealed that instructors had a moderate level of commitment. Research also conducted by Salami and Omole ( 2005 ) and Temesgen ( 2011 ) revealed that employees in the organizations were fairly committed to carrying out their jobs. However, the result of this is contradicted by the finding of Madsen, Miller, and John ( 2005 ) that employees had a higher level of OC and showed a willingness to invest substantial effort on behalf of the organizations and are loyal to it. Moreover, the results of one sample t-test showed that the mean scores of altruism (14.16) and civic virtue (14.72) were higher than the respect test values at (t = 19.509) and (t = 30.680) respectively. This implies that instructors were to some extent volunteers to support their coworkers and universities by offering important suggestions. On the contrary, the mean scores of conscientiousness (13.92), sportsmanship (14.07), and courtesy (14.50) were less than the respective test values at (t = -5.451), (t = -5.131), and (t = -2.619) respectively at p < .05, df = 619. Hence, the mean score of OCB (71.363) was higher than the t value (69) with (t = 5.639, df = 619) at p < .05, indicating that instructors were engaged in citizenship activities to some extent to support the function of their universities. This result is supported by the qualitative result that was found through the interview. This result is quite similar to the findings of (Akyuz, 2012 ; Oguz, 2011 ; and Polat & Celep, 2008 ) on the presence of moderate levels of OCB in workplaces. The finding of this study also supported by Turnipseed and Murkison ( 2000 ) that OCB contributes to the organization by creating positive workplace environments. Extra-role behaviors are also essential for an organization, as they are likely to promote more effective communication, which allows best practices to be shared among employees (Ren-Tao & Heung-Gil, 2009 ). Employees who engage in OCB can enhance organizational effectiveness and efficiency by exerting extra effort beyond their duties. 3.3 Relationships among Organizational justice, Organizational commitment, and Organizational citizenship behavior Table 5 Correlation coefficients of OJ, OC, and OCB Latent variables Unstandardized Standardized Estimate S.E. C.R. P Estimate OJ OC .479 .052 9.211 *** .671 OJ OCB .678 .089 7.617 *** .452 OCB OC .332 .096 3.458 *** .212 As indicated in Table 5 , positive and statistically significant relationships are observed among OJ, OC, and OCB with standardized correlation coefficients ranging from .212 to .671. Specifically, OJ had positive correlation coefficients with OC (r = .671) and OCB (r = .452) by the critical ratio greater than ± 1.96 at p < .05. This finding is congruent with the result of Ghafori and Golparvar ( 2009 ) that OJ had positive and significant correlation with OC because staff perceived their leader to be fair, respectful and unbiased in their dealings. Kıray ( 2011 ) and Shekari ( 2011 ) also found a significant relationship between OJ and OC. Similarly, Damirchi, Hazrati, and Poushaneh ( 2013 ) reported that a significant relationship was found between OJ and OCB. This result is also supported by Nastiezaie and Jenaabadi ( 2016 ) also indicated that OJ was significantly related to OCB. There is also a positive and significant relationship between OC and OCB with a significant correlation coefficient (r = .212) at p < .05. Studies conducted by Gurbuz ( 2006 ) and Wasti ( 2003 ) showed that OC was significantly associated with OCB. Similarly, the findings of other researchers proved the presence of a significant relationship between OC and OCB (Hannam & Jimmieson, 2002 ; Ibrahim & Aslinda, 2013 ; Williams, Rondeau, & Francescutti, 2007 ). This shows that instructors were committed to supporting the function of their universities without expecting rewards in return. This means that the three latent variables in the measurement model are significantly related to each other. 3.4 Path analysis/causal relations Based on the measurement model, the researcher developed a structural model to examine how much of the dependent variables in the structural model are predicted by independent variables as shown in Fig. 4. Table 6: Unstandardized and standardized regression weights of the latent variables in the structural model The results in Table 6 indicated that except for the causal relationship between OC and OCB, the unstandardized regression weights of the latent variables were found significant by the critical ratio tests greater than ± 1.96 at p < .05. The standardized regression coefficients of the latent variables in the structural model ranging from .164 to .667. After testing the structural model fit, the direct and indirect effects of the independent variables on the dependent variables in the structural model were analyzed to examine how much of the variance in the dependent variables, both latent and observed, was predicted by the independent variables that are presented in the following subsections. 3.4.1 Direct effects As shown in Fig. 4 and Table 6 , the paths pointing from OJ to OC (β = .667, p < .05) and OCB (β = .341, p < .05) have positive standardized regression coefficients indicating that OJ significantly predicted both OC and OCB. The standardized regression coefficients also indicated that OJ had a more direct effect on OC than OCB. Thus, the value of R 2 indicated that OJ significantly predicted 44.3% of the variance in OC. Similar to this study, Imamoglu ( 2011 ) reported that OJ had a significant effect on OC. Other researchers also supported the significant influence of OJ on employees’ level of commitment in the workplace (Cropanzano, Bowen, & Gilliland, 2007 ; Demir, 2011 ). The result of this study is also consistent with the works of other researchers on the significant effect of OJ on OCB (Ishak & Alam, 2009 ; Sjahruddin & Sudiro, 2013 ). Moreover, Hassan (2002) also reported that OJ had a significant effect on the organizations' OCB. This implies that employees are inclined to show OCB when they are fairly treated in the workplace. The path that links OC and OCB with a standardized coefficient (β = .164, p > .05) also indicates that OCB was not significantly predicted by OC. The value of R 2 also revealed that 29.2% of the variance in OCB was predicted by the joint effects of OJ and OC, whereas the rest 71% of the variation in OCB was attributed to the residual that couldn’t be explained by the model. In contrast to this result, Alotaibi ( 2001 ) and Carmeli ( 2004 ) found that OC had a significant effect on OCB which is similar to the result of the study. This result is also supported by the findings of other previous studies (Cirka, 2005 ; Harwiki, 2013 ; Liu, 2009 ; Robbin & Judge, 2008 ). 3.4.2 Indirect effect Table 7 revealed that OJ had an indirect and significant effect on OCB through the mediation of OC with a standardized regression coefficient (β = .107, p < .05). This shows that OJ had a significant direct and indirect effect on OCB. This finding is congruent with the finding of Ali ( 2016 ) that employees' perception of justice indirectly and significantly influenced employees to engage in citizenship activities to support their coworkers and organizations through the mediating role of OC. Similarly, Jehanzeb and Mohanty ( 2019 ) found that OC was significantly mediating the effect of OJ perception on the OCB of employees. Table 7 Summary of the direct and indirect effect of OJ and OC on the OCB Effect Variables OJ OC OCB Direct effect OC .667 - - OCB .341 .164 - Indirect effect OCB .107 - - R 2 .443 .292 3.5 Generations of universities as the variances of OJ, OC, and OCB Table 8 One-way ANOVA in OJ, OC, and OCB scores of instructors based on the four generations of universities Variables Generations of universities Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. OJ Between Groups 84.092 3 28.031 132.833 .000 Within Groups 129.990 616 .211 Total 214.082 619 OC Between Groups 2.334 3 .778 3.163 .024 Within Groups 151.496 616 .246 Total 153.830 619 OCB Between Groups 10.493 3 3.498 19.071 .000 Within Groups 112.975 616 .183 Total 123.468 619 *Significance level at .05 level As shown in Table 8 , the result of one-way ANOVA indicated that there were statistically significant differences among instructors in their perception of OJ at F(3,616) = 132.833, and OC at F(3,616) = 3.163, and OCB at F(3,616) = 19.071, p = .000 based on the four generations of universities in Amhra region. This shows that instructors in the four generations of universities of Amhara region had different views regarding the status of OJ, OC, and OCB. 4. Conclusions and Recommendations 4.1 Conclusions Based on the results obtained from the empirical study, the following conclusions are drawn. · The results of one sample t-test revealed that OC and OCB were observed to some extent while OJ was found to a small extent in the universities as perceived by instructors. · There were positive and statistically significant relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB. · OJ had a significant effect on the OC and OCB of instructors with standardized regression coefficients of (b = .667) and (b = .341) respectively. · OC had a statistically significant effect on the OCB of instructors with a standardized regression coefficient of (b = .164) at p<.05. · The result of R 2 indicated that OJ predicted 44.3 % of the variance in OC, while 29.2 % of the variance in OCB was predicted by the joint effects of OJ and OC. · OJ had also an indirect and significant effect on OCB mediated through OC with a standardized regression coefficient of (b = .107) at p<.05. This shows that OJ had significant direct and indirect effects on OCB. · Significant differences were found among instructors in their perception of OJ, OC, and OCB based on the four generations of public universities in Amhra region. 4.2 Recommendations · The universities need to improve the status of OJ by focusing on procedural justice and interactional justice by validating the fairness of methods used to make the decision. · It needs to give high attention to the commitment of academic staff to achieve the goals and objectives of the universities effectively. · Motivate instructors to engage in OCB by creating awareness about the benefit of OCB in supporting the function of the universities. Especially, academic leaders need to encourage instructors to be conscientious, sportsmanship, and courteous. · Universities need to institutionalize OCB for the successful attainment of their mission. This means that every instructor should have an obligation to engage in OCB as part of his/her duty. Declarations The study had no potential risks or benefits on the participants due to participation in the research and received approval from the Institutional Ethics Review Committee (IERC) of the College of Educational and Behavioral Sciences at Bahir Dar University, with the ethics committee approval reference CEBS_IERC_228/2024. Funding The author did not get any funds to conduct this research. The author declares that he has no potential conflict of interest related to this study. References Akyuz, Y. (2012). The staggering rise of the South? (No. 2012/3). Discussion Paper. Alemu, D. (2014). Looking at Human Element in Education: Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction of Teachers at Adama Science and Technology University. In Browsing" SMU Conference Proceedings . Al-Hussami, M. (2008). Relationship to organizational commitment, perceived organizational support, transactional leadership, transformational leadership, and level of education. European Journal of Scientific Research , 22 (2), 286-295. Ali, C. A. (2016). Can ethical leaders enhance their followers’ creativity? Leadership , 12 (2), 230-249. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organ. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63 , 1-18. Alotaibi, A. G. (2001). Antecedents of organizational citizenship behavior: A study of public personnel in Kuwait. Public personnel management , 30 (3), 363-376. Alzubi, Y. Z. (2018). Turnover intentions in Jordanian Universities: The role of leadership behavior, organizational commitment, and organizational culture. International Journal of Advanced & Applied Sciences , 5 (1), 177-192. Aslam, U., Ilyas, M., Imran, M. K., & Rahman, U. U. (2016). Detrimental effects of cynicism on organizational change: An interactive model of organizational cynicism. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29 (4), 580-598. Bez, O. (2010). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and its Relationship with Major Attitudinal Factors: A Comparative Study between Two Police Regions of Turkish National Police. Bosman, J. Buttendach, J., & Laba, K. (2008). Job Insecurity, Burnout and Organizational Commitment among employees of a financial institution in Gauteng. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 5 , 32-40. Carmeli, A. (2004). The link between organizational elements perceived external prestige, and performance. Corporate Reputation Review , 6 (4), 314-331. Chahal, H., & Mehta, S. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of organizational citizenship behavior: A conceptual framework about the health care sector. Journal of Services Research , 10 (2), 25. Cirka, C. C. (2005). When actions speak as loudly as words: Autonomy support, psychological empowerment, and organizational citizenship behavior. Handbook of organizational citizenship behavior , 289-325. Cohen-Charash Y., & Spector, P. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 86 (2), 278-321. Comrey, A., & Lee, H. (1992). A first course in factor analysis . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research . Sage publications. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research . Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Cropanzano, R., Bowen, D. E., & Gilliland, S. W. (2007). The management of organizational justice. Academy of Management Perspectives , 21 (4), 34-48. Crow, M. S., Lee, C. B., & Joo, J. J. (2012). Organizational justice and organizational commitment among South Korean police officers. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management . Dalal, R. S. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. J. of Applied Psychology , 90 (6), 1241. Damirchi, E. S., Hazrati, S., & Poushaneh, K. (2013). Culture of Peace: A Move towards Peace And Peace-Building. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences Vol , 3 . Dean Jr, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of Management Review , 23 (2), 341-352. Demir, M. (2011). Effects of organizational justice, trust and commitment on employees' deviant behavior. Anatolia , 22 (2), 204-221. Everitt, B. S. (1975). Multivariate analysis: The need for data, and other problems. The British Journal of Psychiatry , 126 (3), 237-240. Farrell, D., & Stamm, C. L. (1988). Meta-analysis of the correlates of employee absence. Human Relations , 41 (3), 211-227. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference (10 th ed.). Boston: Pearson. Ghafori, M. R., & Golparvar, M. (2009). Examine the relationship between organizational justice and the organizational commitment component of municipal employees. Journal of Psychological Studies , 5 (4), 1-20. Gurbuz, S. (2006). Research on identifying the relationships between organizational citizenship behavior and affective commitment. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. Hannam, R. L., & Jimmieson, N. L. (2002). The relationship between extra-role behaviors and job burnout for primary school teachers: A preliminary model and development of an organizational citizenship behavior scale. Harwiki, W. (2013). The influence of servant leadership on organization culture, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, and employees' performance. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies , 5 (12), 876-885. Hassan, A., & Jubari, I. H. A. A. (2010). Organizational justice and employee work engagement: LMX as mediator. Journal for International Business and Entrepreneurship Development, 5(2), 167-178. Ho, R. (2006). Handbook of univariate and multivariate data analysis and interpretation with SPSS . Boca Raton, London & New York. Chapman and Hall/CRC. Ibrahim, M. A., & Aslinda, A. (2013). Relationship between organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) at government-owned corporation companies. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 3(3), 35-42. Imamoglu, G. (2011). The relationshıp between primary school teachers? Organizational commitment levels and organizational justice. (Unpublished Master Thesis). Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara. Iqbal, H. K., Aziz, U., & Tasawar, A. (2012). Impact of organizational justice on organizational citizenship behavior: An empirical evidence from Pakistan. World Applied Sciences Journal , 19 (9), 1348-1354. Ishak, N. A., & Alam, S. S. (2009). The effects of leader-member exchange on organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: Empirical study. European Journal of Social Sciences , 8 (2), 324-334. Jafri, M. (2010). Organizational commitment and employee's innovative behavior. Journal of Management Research (09725814) , 10 (1). Jehanzeb, K., & Mohanty, J. (2019). The mediating role of organizational commitment between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Review . Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational researcher , 33 (7), 14-26. Joiner, T. A., & Bakalis, S. (2006). The antecedents of organizational commitment: Australian casual academics. International Journal of Educational Management , 20 (6), 439- 452. Karanja G. W. (2016). Effect of organizational justice on organizational commitment in public secondary schools and Commercial Banks of Kenya. (Doctoral Dissertation: Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology). Karriker, J. H., & Williams, M. L. (2009). Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: A mediated multi-foci model. Journal of Management , 35 (1), 112-135. Kennedy, D. B., Homant, R. J., & Homant, M. R. (2004). Perception of injustice as a predictor of support for workplace aggression. Journal of Business & Psychology , 18 (3), 323-336. Khan, S. K., & Rashid, M. Z. A. (2012). The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment in the Organizational Culture, Leadership and Organizational Justice Relationship with Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Study of Academicians in Private Higher Learning Institutions in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(8), 83-93. Kıray, A. (2011). An empirical study towards identifying the relationship between organizational justice and organizational commitment. Master’s Degree, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Institute of Social Sciences, Çanakkale, Turkey. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Kuswanti, Ningrum, S. & Hamidah, T. (2018). The role of servant leadership in enhancing organizational citizenship behavior through organizational commitment as mediator. International Journal of Education, Learning & Development, 6 (9), 98-106. Lee, K., & Allen, N. (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology , 87 (1), 131. Lilly, J. (2015). The impact of justice type on organizational citizenship behavior: Do outcome favorability and leader behavior matter? Current Psychology , 34 (1), 26-49. Liu, Y. (2009). When change leadership impacts commitment to change and when it doesn't: A multi-level dimensional investigation (Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology). Madsen, S. R., Miller, D., & John, C. R. (2005). Readiness for organizational change: do organizational commitment and social relationships in the workplace make a difference? Human Resource Development Quarterly , 16 (2), 213-234. Marcus, B., & Schuler, H. (2004). Antecedents of counterproductive behavior at work: a general perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology , 89 (4), 647. Meyer, J.., Allen, N. & Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: extensions and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (4) , 538-555. Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology , 76 (6), 845. Mulu, N. (2012). Quality and quality assurance in Ethiopian higher education: Critical issues and practical implications. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Nastiezaie, N., & Jenaabadi, H. (2016). The Relationship of organizational justice with positive organizational behavior and work engagement from the viewpoint of faculty members of Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. Niehoff, B. & Moorman, R. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. The Academy of Management Journal 36(3), 527-556. Oguz, H. (2011). A review from experimental trials on detoxification of aflatoxin in poultry feed. Eurasian J Vet Sci , 27 (1), 1-12. Organ, D. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Pandey, R., & Verma, M. R. (2008). Samples allocation in different strata for impact evaluation of the developmental program. Rev. Mat. Estat , 26 (4), 103-112. Polat, S., & Celep, C. (2008). Perceptions of secondary school teachers on organizational justice, organizational trust, organizational citizenship behaviors. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice , 14 (54), 307-331. Ren-Tao, M., & Heung-Gil, K. (2009). The impact of organizational citizenship behavior on team effectiveness in China: The moderating role of task complexity. Fourth International Conference on Computer Sciences and Convergence IT (pp. 641-646). Seoul. Robbin, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Perilaku Organisasi: Organizational Behavior. Jakarta: Salemba Empat. Salami, S. O., & Omole, O. A. (2005). Participation in decision-making process, incentives, and training as predictors of organizational commitment among industrial workers. African journal for the psychological study of social issues , 8 (2), 210-227. Schappe, S. P. (1998). The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and fairness perceptions on organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Psychology , 132 (3), 277- 290. Shekari, G. (2011). Studying the relationship between organizational justice and organizational commitment among the employees of Meezan Financial Institution of Mashhad in the year 2011. M.A thesis. Azad Eslami University of Mashad. Shin, J., & Sohn, Y. W. (2015). Effects of employees' social comparison behaviors on distributive justice perception and job satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal , 43 (7), 1071-1083. Sjahruddin, H., & Sudiro, A. A. (2013). Organizational justice, organizational commitment and trust in manager as a predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research Business , 4 (12), 133-141. Spector, P. E., & Che, X. X. (2014). Re-examining citizenship: How the control of measurement artifacts affects observed relationships of organizational citizenship behavior and organizational variables. Human Performance , 27 (2), 165-182. Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2002). An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: Some parallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource Management Review , 12 (2), 269-292. Temesgen, T. (2011). The relationship between Leadership Styles and Employee Commitment in Private Higher Education Institutions at Addis Ababa City. (Master thesis: Addis Ababa University). Turnipseed, D., & Murkison, G. (2000). Good soldiers and their syndrome: OCB and the work environment. North American Journal of Psychology , 2 (2), 281. Vardi, Y., & Wiener, Y. (1996). Misbehavior in organizations: A motivational framework. Organization Science , 7 (2), 151-165. Wajdee, M. E., Gurvinder, K., & Shehadehmofleh, A. (2018). Organizational justice and its relationship with organizational citizenship behavior of non-academic staff members at government universities in the north of Jordan. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 17 (6), 1-11. Wasti, S. A. (2003). Organizational commitment, turnover intentions and the influence of cultural values. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 76(3), 303- Williams, E. S., Rondeau, K. V., & Francescutti, L. H. (2007). Impact of culture on commitment, satisfaction, and extra‐role behaviors among Canadian ER physicians. Leadership in Health Services. Zhang, D. (2011). Organizational citizenship behavior. White Paper , 3 . Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5941911","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":409899009,"identity":"294781ca-c308-4931-aebc-1c7765fac710","order_by":0,"name":"Shimelis Mesfin","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6199-828X","institution":"University of Gondar","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shimelis","middleName":"","lastName":"Mesfin","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-02-01 12:59:12","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5941911/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5941911/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":75988146,"identity":"9727f8dc-54e9-4c94-81ae-4d23abd22cbd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-11 08:39:36","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":50263,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5941911/v1/9c1fdc36385a4a72bd83340d.png"},{"id":75988140,"identity":"6ddfdb1a-574a-4ab2-b7e1-f303e2d92edb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-11 08:39:34","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":63191,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eExplanatory sequential mixed design, adapted from Creswell (2014)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5941911/v1/8ac20f529a037a79c1868788.png"},{"id":75988144,"identity":"562bc171-92a5-44c0-9069-f341f3a9bc93","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-11 08:39:36","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":128249,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5941911/v1/382b96fa20f20fdc67d04340.png"},{"id":75988137,"identity":"91c2cbb0-25f8-42c8-8d5e-79bb7791cde3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-11 08:39:34","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":148184,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5941911/v1/a70bcee845cf88c27faac954.png"},{"id":75988527,"identity":"de037685-3aed-4efd-bf61-33e83f1937ea","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-11 08:47:48","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1517351,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5941911/v1/8872c2b7-2abb-4185-97b5-498ab1dfc077.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe effect of organizational Justice on organizational citizenship behavior through the mediating role of Organizational commitment in the Public universities in Amhara region\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThough different factors have their own contributions to the function of organizations, organizational justice (OJ), organizational commitment (OC) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) play important roles in enhancing the success of organizations. Specifically, OJ is concerned with employees’ perception of fair treatment in the organization which is conceptualized in terms of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice (Cohen-Charash \u0026amp; Spector, 2001). Whereas OC is viewed as the desire of employees to stay in the organizations defined in terms of affective, continuance, and normative commitment which are related to each other (Allen \u0026amp; Meyer, 1990). Concerning OCB, it is discretionary behavior neither in the job description nor recognized in the formal reward system understood in altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue (Organ, 1988).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings of the previous studies indicated that significant relationships are found among OJ, OC, and OCB. For instance, Karanja (2016) found that OJ had a significant effect on employees’ levels of commitment. Furthermore, studies conducted by Khan and Rashid (2012) and Crow, Lee, and Joo (2012) indicated that employees’ feeling of justice significantly influenced their OC. In the same way, Karriker and Williams (2009) found that employees' engagement in citizenship activities benefits the organizations to be effective. Other researchers found that employees’ level of engagement in citizenship activities was significantly determined by OJ (Lilly, 2015; Shin \u0026amp; Sohn, 2015). This means that employees who perceive fairness in the treatment of their leaders are more likely to engage in citizenship behaviors. Moreover, the findings of several studies indicated that OC had a significant effect on the OCB of employees (Alotaibi, 2001; Carmeli, 2004; Harwiki, 2013; Kwantes, 2003; Liu, 2009). This indicates that there are causal relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the discussions made so far about OJ, OC, and OCB as well as the relationships among these variables, the researcher synthesized a new conceptual framework for this study as indicated in Figure 1. This framework considers OJ as an independent variable that affects OCB. It also explains OC as the mediating variable in the relationship between OJ and OCB. OCB is considered a dependent variable that is affected by OJ directly and indirectly.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOJ, OC, and OCB are important variables linked with the effectiveness of any organization including higher education institutions. The findings of many studies indicated that employees show distrust towards the goals of the organization (Dean, Brandes, \u0026amp; Dharwadkar, 1998) and exhibit workplace aggression (Kennedy, Homant, \u0026amp; Homant, 2004) due to lack of fair treatment in the organization. These situations lead to increased turnover intention and interpersonal deviance (Cohen-Charash \u0026amp; Spector, 2001), exhibit counter-productive work behavior (Spector \u0026amp; Fox, 2002) and low commitment, and eventually, they may pursue to leave the organization (Aslam, Ilyas, Imran, \u0026amp; Rahman, 2016). These indicate that employees who are deprived of justice in the organization will be susceptible to stress and burn-out leading to low productivity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConcerning commitment, the findings of many studies indicated that a low level of commitment leads to turnover and attrition (Joiner \u0026amp; Bakalis, 2006), absenteeism (Farrell \u0026amp; Stamm, 1988), counter-productive behavior (Dalal, 2005), and decline in altruism and compliance (Schappe, 1998). A survey conducted by Bosman, Buttendach, and Laba (2008) showed that a high level of employee turnover was associated with poor function of the organization and increased costs involved in selecting and training replacements. These can cause a loss of work progress, productivity, organizational status, and poor relationships with customers (Alzubi, 2018). High turnover rates can increase the cost of recruitment, training, and retention of staff (Al-Hussami, 2008), as well as negatively affect the success of the organization in attaining strategic objectives, sustaining competitive advantage, and keeping the morale, productivity, and quality of work in the organization (Alzubi, 2018). Similarly, the shortage of professionally capable, motivated, and committed leaders is another challenge in Ethiopian universities (Mulu, 2012).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOCB is another important issue that maximizes the performance of the organizations by encouraging employees to exert extra effort. Though OCB contributes to the development of employees and organizational effectiveness, it is not officially recognized by many organizations (Organ, 1988). Due to this reason, research has not been conducted on OCB in Ethiopian higher education institutions in general and in public universities in particular. Bez (2010) also believed that shortage of studies related to OCB undermines the contribution of employees in the organizations. Discrimination, organizational injustice, and habituation are considered as the major factors that discourage employees from engaging in OCB (Zhang, 2011). This will not only lead to a decrease in the participation of employees in OCB but also enable them to engage in counterproductive behavior such as theft and absenteeism (Marcus \u0026amp; Schuler, 2004). This suggests that organizations will be effective if employees are willing to be involved in OCB.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough several studies have been done on OJ, OC, and OCB in various organizations, sufficient studies have not been conducted on the effect of OJ on OCB in the context of higher education institutions. Despite limited studies have been done on the direct causal relationship between OJ and OCB (Chahal \u0026amp; Mehta, 2011; Iqbal, Aziz, \u0026amp; Tasawar, 2012; Shin \u0026amp; Sohn, 2015; Spector \u0026amp; Che, 2014), a study has not been conducted on the indirect effect of OJ on OCB through the mediation of OC in the context of Ethiopian public universities in general and in the public universities of Amhara region in particular. As a result, this study examined the effect of OJ on OCB through the mediating role of OC in the public universities in Amhara region.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2.\tResearch Questions ","content":"\u003cp\u003e1.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;What is the perception of instructors towards OJ, OC, and OCB in the public universities in Amhara region?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;What are the relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB in the public universities in Amhara region?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;What is the effect of OJ on OC and OCB in the public universities in Amhara region?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;What is the effect of OC on OCB in the public universities in Amhara region?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;What is the indirect effect of OJ on OCB of mediated by OC in the public universities in Amhara region?\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Are there significant differences among instructors in their perception of OJ, OC, and OCB in the four generations of public universities in Amhara region?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.\u0026nbsp;Research Methods\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1\u0026nbsp; Research Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the nature of the study, explanatory sequential mixed design (QUAN \u0026nbsp; qual) was employed to understand the quantitative results in depth using the qualitative data. Explanatory sequential mixed design has a strong quantitative orientation in which the researcher first gathers the quantitative data analyzes the results, and then plans the qualitative phase of the study using the quantitative results (Creswell, 2014). This design will capitalize on the strengths and minimize the limitations of quantitative and qualitative research approaches (Creswell \u0026amp; Clark, 2007; Johnson \u0026amp; Onwuegbuzie, 2004). A simplified illustration of explanatory sequential mixed design is shown in Figure 2.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.2\u0026nbsp;Population, sample, and sampling techniques\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere are 10 public universities in Amhara region. These universities are categorized into four generations based on the year of establishment. \u0026nbsp;Initially, six universities were selected out of 10 from the specified strata. That is, the University of Gondar from the 1\u003csup\u003est\u003c/sup\u003e generation, Wollo and Debre Markos Universities from the 2\u003csup\u003end\u003c/sup\u003e generation, Debre Tabor University from the 3\u003csup\u003erd\u003c/sup\u003e generation, and Injibara and Debarq universities from the 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e generation were selected using a stratified random sampling technique. These stratifications also allowed us to ensure the representation of universities from each generation and make comparisons among respondents in their perception of servant leadership, OC, and OCB.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThen, 21 colleges were selected from the six universities to determine the size of the population and subpopulations of the study. Specifically, five colleges from the University of Gondar, four colleges from Wollo University, four colleges from Debre Markos University, four colleges from Debre Tabor University, two colleges from Injibara University, and two colleges from Debark University were selected using a simple random sampling technique mainly lottery method. In this regard, a total of 2170 instructors in the selected universities were taken as the population of the study. Of these; 731 from the 1\u003csup\u003est\u003c/sup\u003e generation, 710 from the 2\u003csup\u003end\u003c/sup\u003e generation, 427 from the 3\u003csup\u003erd\u003c/sup\u003e generation, and 302 from the 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e generation were considered as the subpopulations of the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDifferent sampling techniques are used to determine the sample size of various studies. Item-respondent proportion requirement is highly recommended by different authorities to determine the size of the sample to undertake factor analysis. Though there is no single criterion that determines the necessary sample size, Comrey and Lee (1992) suggested that a sample size of 500 and above would be good for carrying out factor analysis. Based on the recommendations of Everitt (1975), Ho (2006), and Kline (2011), 10 respondents per each item were used as a method to determine the sample size of this study. Accordingly, the sample size of this study was 620 since the number of items under the dimensions of the latent variables in the questionnaire was 62.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter determining the total sample size of the study, the sample size of each stratum was determined based on the size of their population using a proportionate stratified sampling method developed by Pandey and Verma (2008). This helps to select representative samples from each stratum with the assumption that the number of instructors in the selected strata was significantly varied. Hence, the researcher determined the sample size of each stratum by dividing the population size of the k\u003csup\u003eth\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003estrata by the total population size and multiplying by the total sample size using Pandey and Verma\u0026apos;s (2008) formula as given below. i.e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOf the total sample of 620 instructors; 209 from the 1\u003csup\u003est\u003c/sup\u003e generation, 203 from the 2\u003csup\u003end\u003c/sup\u003e generation, 122 from the 3\u003csup\u003erd\u003c/sup\u003e generation, and 86 from the 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e generation were taken into the sample using the above-given formula. This helped to avoid the misrepresentation of some members of the population in the study. These samples were selected using a simple random sampling technique. The summary of the population and sample of the study are shown in Table 1 below. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 1: Summary of population and sample of the study\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"630\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStrata\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eName of universities\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePopulation size of each university (N\u003csub\u003ek\u003c/sub\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSample size of \u0026nbsp;each university (n\u003csub\u003ek\u003c/sub\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003csup\u003est\u003c/sup\u003e generation \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Gondar\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e731\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e209\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWollo University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e280\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003csup\u003end\u003c/sup\u003e generation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDebre Markos University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e430\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e123\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003csup\u003erd\u003c/sup\u003e generation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDebre Tabor University\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e427\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e122\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInjibara University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e145\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e generation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDebark University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e157\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20.7937%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.4762%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 23.9683%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN= 2170\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24.7619%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003en= 620\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith regard to the qualitative phase of the study, five department heads were included in the sample using purposive sampling techniques to collect the qualitative data through semi-structured interviews to further explain the quantitative results. \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.3\u0026nbsp;Data Gathering Instruments\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe researcher used a standardized questionnaire to collect the quantitative data. The questionnaire has four parts containing close-ended items. The first part dealt with respondents\u0026apos; characteristics related to sex, educational qualification, work experience, and universities in which they have been working. The second part of the questionnaire contains 19 items developed by Moorman (1991) and Niehoff and Moorman (1993) to assess respondents\u0026apos; perceived OJ in terms of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. The third part of the questionnaire measured respondents\u0026apos; perception of OC using 18 items organized into three dimensions \u0026ndash; affective commitment, continual commitment, and normative commitment developed by Meyer et al. (1993). The fourth part of the questionnaire contains 25 items developed by Lee and Allen (2002) to measure respondents\u0026apos; OCB in universities. This scale consists of five dimensions such as altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue to fully understand the status of OCB in the universities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinally, respondents were asked to rate items using five points of Likert-type items ranging from 1 (\u003cem\u003enot at all\u003c/em\u003e) to 5 (\u003cem\u003every great extent\u003c/em\u003e) to measure, OJ, OC, and OCB in the universities.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith regard to qualitative data, a semi-structured interview was conducted to assess the status of OJ, OC, and OCB in the study area.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.4\u0026nbsp;Pilot Test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA pilot test was conducted on 90 selected instructors of Bahir Dar University to assess the reliability of the questionnaire. The distribution of the sample for the pilot test followed the same procedures as in the main sample of the study. Cronbach Alpha was used to test the reliability of items. The reliability coefficients of the instrument with Cronbach Alpha (\u0026alpha;) = (.92, .87 \u0026amp; .94), (.83, .82 \u0026amp; .88) and (.83, .85, .90, .86 \u0026amp; .88) for items about the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB respectively. This shows that items in the respective dimensions of latent variables with reliability coefficients \u003cu\u003e\u0026gt;\u003c/u\u003e.80 were found internally consistent in measuring OJ, OC, and OCB (George \u0026amp; Mallery, 2010).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.5\u0026nbsp;Data Collection Procedures\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFirstly, the researcher got a permission letter from Bahir Dar University to collect the data from the research sites. Based on the given permission, the list of the target respondents was accessed, and the required sample size. Respondents were provided information about the purpose of the study before they took place in the study. Participants were also informed about the absence of potential risks and benefits due to participation in the study. Then, the questionnaire was distributed to the respondents and they were given three days to complete the questionnaire.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter the questionnaire was returned to the researcher and analyzed the data, a face-to-face interview was conducted with each respondent inside the compounds of the universities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.6\u0026nbsp;Data Analysis Techniques\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBoth quantitative and qualitative analysis techniques were used to analyze the data. Specifically, a one-sample t-test was used to measure OJ, OC, and OCB (Research question #1). Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to assess the relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB (Research question #2). SEM was employed to analyze the effect of OJ on OC and OCB of instructors (Research question #3). The effect of OC on the OCB of instructors was analyzed using SEM (Research question #4). SEM was also used to analyze the indirect effect of OJ on the OCB of instructors mediated by OC (Research question #5). One-way ANOVA was employed to assess whether there are significant differences among instructors in their perception of OJ, OC, and OCB in the four generations of public universities in Amhara region (Research question #6). Moreover, the data collected through semi-structured interviews were analyzed qualitatively with the intent to further understand the quantitative results in depth.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis section presents the results of the study according to the themes of the research questions. It began with testing the construct validity of the respective dimensions of latent variables and measurement model fit through conducting exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Factor Analyses\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlthough there is no clear criterion to decide what is large or small, items with factor loadings\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.33 and above are considered to satisfy the minimum level of threshold based on the recommendation of Ho (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). The result of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that 55 items in the respective dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB had high factor loadings above the cutoff point of \u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.33 were retained. Specifically, the factor loading values of these items range from .628 to .914 which explained more than 50% of the variance in the constructs was maintained. However, seven items with low factor loadings were rejected from the analysis for they suppressed the reliability of the results. The result of the principal component analysis also showed that the factor loadings of OJ, OC, and OCB dimensions with eigenvalues ranging from 1.464 to 3.896 are higher than the minimum threshold of 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBased on the results of construct validity, the researcher developed the measurement model using the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB as indicated in Fig. 3.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThough there is little agreement among scholars on the type of fit indices and their thresholds, the researcher used relative chi-square (CMIN/DF), goodness fit index (GFI), adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), normed fit index (NFI), incremental fit index (IFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), comparative fit index (CFI) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) to assess the degree to which the measurement model fits the observed covariance matrix using AMOS as indicated in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAMOS outputs on the fitness indices against the criteria of the measurement model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCriteria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eObtained values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThreshold\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelative chi-square (CMIN/DF)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.036\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGoodness of fit index (GFI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.964\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.942\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNormed fit index (NFI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.940\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncremental fit index (IFI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.959\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTucker-Lewis index (TLI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.945\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComparative fit index (CFI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.959\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRoot mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.047\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs it has been indicated in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, the measurement model satisfied all the fit indices. That is, the results indicated that the measurement model fits the observed variance\u0026ndash;covariance matrix by the chi-square test (CMIN/DF), \u0026chi;2 (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;620, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;124.464, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05. In addition, the fit indices of GFI (.964), AGFI (.942), NFI (.940), IFI (.959), TLI (.945) and CFI (.959) were higher than the threshold of .90 and RMSEA (.047) was lower than the cutoff of point .05 with p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.000.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe maximum likelihood estimates of the unstandardized repression and standardized regression weights also confirmed that all the path coefficients in the measurement model are significant at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05 as shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnstandardized and standardized regression weights of the measurement model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParameters/dimensions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnstandardized\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandardized\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEstimate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eS.E.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC.R.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEstimate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDistributive justice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOJ\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.472\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.072\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.529\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.329\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProcedural justice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOJ\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.859\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.082\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.535\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.709\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInteractional justice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOJ\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.659\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAffective commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.582\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.048\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.044\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.538\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eContinuance commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.823\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.054\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.175\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.731\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNormative commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.0000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.857\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAltruism\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.653\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConscientiousness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.070\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.075\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.196\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.690\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSportsmanship\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.088\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.073\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.922\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.737\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCourtesy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.172\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.076\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.338\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.766\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCivic virtue\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;---\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.147\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.076\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.095\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.749\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, the regression weights of all the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB were significant with the critical ratio test greater than \u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.96 at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05. From this, it is possible to conclude that the critical ratio tests of the 11 dimensions were extremely far from the threshold of \u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.96 indicates a significant path at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05. Likewise, the standardized regression weights of all dimensions in the measurement model were significantly represented by their respective latent variables. Specifically, the standardized regression weights of the observed variables in the measurement model range from .329 (distributive justice) to .857 (normative commitment). In other words, the observed variables explained the respective latent constructs ranging from 10.8% (distributive justice) to 73.4% (normative commitment). This indicated that the observed variables were significantly represented by their respective latent variables at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTherefore, the measurement model analysis confirmed that all dimensions were internally consistent and structurally valid to measure OJ, OC, and OCB in the context of this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Status of Organizational justice, commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA one-sample t-test for the dimensions of OJ, OC, and OCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDimensions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTest value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean difference\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et-value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.(2-tailed)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganizational justice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDistributive justice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.934\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.635\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.878\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProcedural justice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.051\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-3.924\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-24.121\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInteractional justice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.133\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.777\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-10.709\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.934\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.446\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-4.066\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-11.987\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganizational commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAffective commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.281\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.805\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.653\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eContinuance commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.778\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.956\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-10.196\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNormative commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.116\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.132\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.037\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.981\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.054\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.981\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.398\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganizational citizenship behavior\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAltruism\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.756\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.160\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.509\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConscientiousness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.943\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.082\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.451\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSportsmanship\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.509\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.929\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.131\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCourtesy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.800\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.505\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.619\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCivic virtue\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.207\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.719\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.680\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e71.363\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.433\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.363\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.639\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003eN\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;620, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619, *Sig. \u0026lt;.05\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs indicated in Tale 4, the result of one sample t-test revealed that the mean score of distributive justice (13.64) was greater than the test value at (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;13.878) at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619. This means that instructors fairly perceived the state of distributive justice in the workplace. On the other hand, the mean scores of procedural justice (11.08) and interactional justice (19.22) were less than the respective test values at (t = -24.121) and (t = -10.709) respectively at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619. Hence, the mean score of OJ (43.934) was lower than the t value (48) with (t = -11.987, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619) at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, indicating that OJ was observed to a small extent in the respective universities. This result is quite similar to the qualitative result obtained through the interview. The finding of this study is supported by other researchers. For example, a more recent work of Wajdee, Gurvinder, and Shehadehmofleh (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) revealed that employees had good perceptions of OJ in public universities, which is congruent with this finding. However, the findings of Cohen and Spector (2001), Spector and Fox (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e), and Vardi and Wiener (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e) indicated that employees are exposed to stress, turnover, dissatisfaction, low commitment, distrust, and violence leading to low productivity due to lack of OJ in the organizations.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWith regard to OC, the mean scores of affective commitment (22.80) and normative commitment (14.13) were higher than the respective test values at (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;22.653) and (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;17.037) at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619. This implies that instructors were moderately committed to carrying out their jobs due to their emotional attachment to the universities and sense of responsibility to serve the universities. Conversely, the mean score of continuance commitment (16.04) was lower than the test value at (t = -10.196). Thus, the mean score of OC (52.981) was higher than the t value (48) with (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.398, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619) at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, indicating that instructors in the research sites were committed to some extent to performing their job. A similar result was also found in the interview. This result is supported by Jafri (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) that academic staff had a moderate level of commitment to maintaining membership in the organization. Consistent with this result, Alemu (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) at Adama Science and Technology University revealed that instructors had a moderate level of commitment. Research also conducted by Salami and Omole (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) and Temesgen (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) revealed that employees in the organizations were fairly committed to carrying out their jobs. However, the result of this is contradicted by the finding of Madsen, Miller, and John (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) that employees had a higher level of OC and showed a willingness to invest substantial effort on behalf of the organizations and are loyal to it.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMoreover, the results of one sample t-test showed that the mean scores of altruism (14.16) and civic virtue (14.72) were higher than the respect test values at (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19.509) and (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;30.680) respectively. This implies that instructors were to some extent volunteers to support their coworkers and universities by offering important suggestions. On the contrary, the mean scores of conscientiousness (13.92), sportsmanship (14.07), and courtesy (14.50) were less than the respective test values at (t = -5.451), (t = -5.131), and (t = -2.619) respectively at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619. Hence, the mean score of OCB (71.363) was higher than the t value (69) with (t\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.639, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;619) at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, indicating that instructors were engaged in citizenship activities to some extent to support the function of their universities. This result is supported by the qualitative result that was found through the interview. This result is quite similar to the findings of (Akyuz, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Oguz, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; and Polat \u0026amp; Celep, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) on the presence of moderate levels of OCB in workplaces. The finding of this study also supported by Turnipseed and Murkison (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) that OCB contributes to the organization by creating positive workplace environments. Extra-role behaviors are also essential for an organization, as they are likely to promote more effective communication, which allows best practices to be shared among employees (Ren-Tao \u0026amp; Heung-Gil, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Employees who engage in OCB can enhance organizational effectiveness and efficiency by exerting extra effort beyond their duties.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3 Relationships among Organizational justice, Organizational commitment, and Organizational citizenship behavior\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorrelation coefficients of OJ, OC, and OCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLatent variables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnstandardized\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandardized\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEstimate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eS.E.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC.R.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEstimate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOJ\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;--\u0026gt;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.479\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.052\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.211\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.671\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOJ\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;--\u0026gt;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.678\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.089\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.617\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.452\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;--\u0026gt;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.332\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.096\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.458\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.212\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs indicated in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, positive and statistically significant relationships are observed among OJ, OC, and OCB with standardized correlation coefficients ranging from .212 to .671. Specifically, OJ had positive correlation coefficients with OC (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.671) and OCB (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.452) by the critical ratio greater than \u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.96 at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05. This finding is congruent with the result of Ghafori and Golparvar (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e) that OJ had positive and significant correlation with OC because staff perceived their leader to be fair, respectful and unbiased in their dealings. Kıray (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) and Shekari (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) also found a significant relationship between OJ and OC. Similarly, Damirchi, Hazrati, and Poushaneh (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) reported that a significant relationship was found between OJ and OCB. This result is also supported by Nastiezaie and Jenaabadi (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) also indicated that OJ was significantly related to OCB. There is also a positive and significant relationship between OC and OCB with a significant correlation coefficient (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.212) at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05. Studies conducted by Gurbuz (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e) and Wasti (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e) showed that OC was significantly associated with OCB. Similarly, the findings of other researchers proved the presence of a significant relationship between OC and OCB (Hannam \u0026amp; Jimmieson, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e; Ibrahim \u0026amp; Aslinda, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Williams, Rondeau, \u0026amp; Francescutti, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). This shows that instructors were committed to supporting the function of their universities without expecting rewards in return. This means that the three latent variables in the measurement model are significantly related to each other.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4 Path analysis/causal relations\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBased on the measurement model, the researcher developed a structural model to examine how much of the dependent variables in the structural model are predicted by independent variables as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;4.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable 6: Unstandardized and standardized regression weights of the latent variables in the structural model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe results in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e indicated that except for the causal relationship between OC and OCB, the unstandardized regression weights of the latent variables were found significant by the critical ratio tests greater than \u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.96 at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05. The standardized regression coefficients of the latent variables in the structural model ranging from .164 to .667.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAfter testing the structural model fit, the direct and indirect effects of the independent variables on the dependent variables in the structural model were analyzed to examine how much of the variance in the dependent variables, both latent and observed, was predicted by the independent variables that are presented in the following subsections.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.1 Direct effects\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs shown in Fig. 4 and Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, the paths pointing from OJ to OC (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.667, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05) and OCB (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.341, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05) have positive standardized regression coefficients indicating that OJ significantly predicted both OC and OCB. The standardized regression coefficients also indicated that OJ had a more direct effect on OC than OCB. Thus, the value of R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e indicated that OJ significantly predicted 44.3% of the variance in OC. Similar to this study, Imamoglu (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) reported that OJ had a significant effect on OC. Other researchers also supported the significant influence of OJ on employees\u0026rsquo; level of commitment in the workplace (Cropanzano, Bowen, \u0026amp; Gilliland, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Demir, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). The result of this study is also consistent with the works of other researchers on the significant effect of OJ on OCB (Ishak \u0026amp; Alam, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Sjahruddin \u0026amp; Sudiro, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, Hassan (2002) also reported that OJ had a significant effect on the organizations\u0026apos; OCB. This implies that employees are inclined to show OCB when they are fairly treated in the workplace.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe path that links OC and OCB with a standardized coefficient (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.164, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.05) also indicates that OCB was not significantly predicted by OC. The value of R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e also revealed that 29.2% of the variance in OCB was predicted by the joint effects of OJ and OC, whereas the rest 71% of the variation in OCB was attributed to the residual that couldn\u0026rsquo;t be explained by the model. In contrast to this result, Alotaibi (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e) and Carmeli (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) found that OC had a significant effect on OCB which is similar to the result of the study. This result is also supported by the findings of other previous studies (Cirka, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Harwiki, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Liu, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Robbin \u0026amp; Judge, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.2 Indirect effect\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e revealed that OJ had an indirect and significant effect on OCB through the mediation of OC with a standardized regression coefficient (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.107, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05). This shows that OJ had a significant direct and indirect effect on OCB. This finding is congruent with the finding of Ali (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) that employees\u0026apos; perception of justice indirectly and significantly influenced employees to engage in citizenship activities to support their coworkers and organizations through the mediating role of OC. Similarly, Jehanzeb and Mohanty (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) found that OC was significantly mediating the effect of OJ perception on the OCB of employees.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSummary of the direct and indirect effect of OJ and OC on the OCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOJ\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.667\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.341\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.164\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.107\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.443\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.292\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5 Generations of universities as the variances of OJ, OC, and OCB\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab8\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOne-way ANOVA in OJ, OC, and OCB scores of instructors based on the four generations of universities\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGenerations of universities\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOJ\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e84.092\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.031\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e132.833\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e129.990\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e616\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.211\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e214.082\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e619\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.334\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.778\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.163\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.024\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e151.496\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e616\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.246\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e153.830\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e619\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOCB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.493\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.498\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.071\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e112.975\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e616\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.183\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e123.468\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e619\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e*Significance level at .05 level\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, the result of one-way ANOVA indicated that there were statistically significant differences among instructors in their perception of OJ at F(3,616)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;132.833, and OC at F(3,616)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.163, and OCB at F(3,616)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19.071, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.000 based on the four generations of universities in Amhra region. This shows that instructors in the four generations of universities of Amhara region had different views regarding the status of OJ, OC, and OCB.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Conclusions and Recommendations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1\u0026nbsp;Conclusions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the results obtained from the empirical study, the following conclusions are drawn.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· The results of one sample t-test revealed that OC and OCB were observed to some extent while OJ was found to a small extent in the universities as perceived by instructors.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· There were positive and statistically significant relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· OJ had a significant effect on the OC and OCB of instructors with standardized regression coefficients of (b\u0026nbsp;= .667) and (b\u0026nbsp;= .341) respectively.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· OC had a statistically significant effect on the OCB of instructors with a standardized regression coefficient of (b\u0026nbsp;= .164) at p\u0026lt;.05.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· The result of R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e indicated that OJ predicted 44.3 % of the variance in OC, while 29.2 % of the variance in OCB was predicted by the joint effects of OJ and OC.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· OJ had also an indirect and significant effect on OCB mediated through OC with a standardized regression coefficient of (b\u0026nbsp;= .107) at p\u0026lt;.05. This shows that OJ had significant direct and indirect effects on OCB. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· Significant differences were found among instructors in their perception of OJ, OC, and OCB based on the four generations of public universities in Amhra region.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2\u0026nbsp;Recommendations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· The universities need to improve the status of OJ by focusing on procedural justice and interactional justice by validating the fairness of methods used to make the decision.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· It needs to give high attention to the commitment of academic staff to achieve the goals and objectives of the universities effectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· Motivate instructors to engage in OCB by creating awareness about the benefit of OCB in supporting the function of the universities. Especially, academic leaders need to encourage instructors to be conscientious, sportsmanship, and courteous.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· Universities need to institutionalize OCB for the successful attainment of their mission. This means that every instructor should have an obligation to engage in OCB as part of his/her duty. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study had no potential risks or benefits on the participants due to participation in the research and received approval from the Institutional Ethics Review Committee (IERC) of the College of Educational and Behavioral Sciences at Bahir Dar University, with the ethics committee approval reference CEBS_IERC_228/2024.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author did not get any funds to conduct this research.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author declares that he has no potential conflict of interest related to this study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAkyuz, Y. (2012). \u003cem\u003eThe staggering rise of the South?\u003c/em\u003e (No. 2012/3). Discussion Paper.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlemu, D. (2014). Looking at Human Element in Education: Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction of Teachers at Adama Science and Technology University. \u003cem\u003eIn Browsing\u0026quot; SMU Conference Proceedings\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAl-Hussami, M. (2008). Relationship to organizational commitment, perceived organizational support, transactional leadership, transformational leadership, and level of education. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Scientific Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(2), 286-295.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAli, C. A. (2016). Can ethical leaders enhance their followers\u0026rsquo; creativity? \u003cem\u003eLeadership\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(2), 230-249.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAllen, N. J., \u0026amp; Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organ. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Occupational Psychology, 63\u003c/em\u003e, 1-18.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlotaibi, A. G. (2001). Antecedents of organizational citizenship behavior: A study of public personnel in Kuwait. \u003cem\u003ePublic personnel management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(3), 363-376.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlzubi, Y. Z. (2018). Turnover intentions in Jordanian Universities: The role of leadership behavior, organizational commitment, and organizational culture. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Advanced \u0026amp; Applied Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(1), 177-192.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAslam, U., Ilyas, M., Imran, M. K., \u0026amp; Rahman, U. U. (2016). Detrimental effects of cynicism on organizational change: An interactive model of organizational cynicism.\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29\u003c/em\u003e(4), 580-598.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBez, O. (2010). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and its Relationship with Major Attitudinal Factors: A Comparative Study between Two Police Regions of Turkish National Police.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBosman, J. Buttendach, J., \u0026amp; Laba, K. (2008). Job Insecurity, Burnout and Organizational Commitment among employees of a financial institution in Gauteng. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Industrial Psychology, 5\u003c/em\u003e, 32-40.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCarmeli, A. (2004). The link between organizational elements perceived external prestige, and performance. \u003cem\u003eCorporate Reputation Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(4), 314-331.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChahal, H., \u0026amp; Mehta, S. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of organizational citizenship behavior: A conceptual framework about the health care sector. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Services Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(2), 25.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCirka, C. C. (2005). When actions speak as loudly as words: Autonomy support, psychological empowerment, and organizational citizenship behavior. \u003cem\u003eHandbook of organizational citizenship behavior\u003c/em\u003e, 289-325.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCohen-Charash Y., \u0026amp; Spector, P. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e86\u003c/em\u003e(2), 278-321.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eComrey, A., \u0026amp; Lee, H. (1992). \u003cem\u003eA first course in factor analysis\u003c/em\u003e. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCreswell, J. W. (2014). \u003cem\u003eA concise introduction to mixed methods research\u003c/em\u003e. Sage publications.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCreswell, J. W., \u0026amp; Clark, V. P. (2007). \u003cem\u003eDesigning and conducting mixed methods research\u003c/em\u003e. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCropanzano, R., Bowen, D. E., \u0026amp; Gilliland, S. W. (2007). The management of organizational justice. \u003cem\u003eAcademy of Management Perspectives\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(4), 34-48.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCrow, M. S., Lee, C. B., \u0026amp; Joo, J. J. (2012). Organizational justice and organizational commitment among South Korean police officers. \u003cem\u003ePolicing: An International Journal of Police Strategies \u0026amp; Management\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDalal, R. S. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. \u003cem\u003eJ. of Applied Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e90\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1241.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDamirchi, E. S., Hazrati, S., \u0026amp; Poushaneh, K. (2013). Culture of Peace: A Move towards Peace And Peace-Building. \u003cem\u003eResearch on Humanities and Social Sciences Vol\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDean Jr, J. W., Brandes, P., \u0026amp; Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. \u003cem\u003eAcademy of Management Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(2), 341-352.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDemir, M. (2011). Effects of organizational justice, trust and commitment on employees\u0026apos; deviant behavior. \u003cem\u003eAnatolia\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(2), 204-221.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEveritt, B. S. (1975). Multivariate analysis: The need for data, and other problems. \u003cem\u003eThe British Journal of Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e126\u003c/em\u003e(3), 237-240.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFarrell, D., \u0026amp; Stamm, C. L. (1988). Meta-analysis of the correlates of employee absence. \u003cem\u003eHuman Relations\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(3), 211-227.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGeorge, D., \u0026amp; Mallery, P. (2010). \u003cem\u003eSPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eReference\u003c/em\u003e (10\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e ed.). Boston: Pearson.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGhafori, M. R., \u0026amp; Golparvar, M. (2009). Examine the relationship between organizational justice and the organizational commitment component of municipal employees. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Psychological Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(4), 1-20.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGurbuz, S. (2006). Research on identifying the relationships between organizational citizenship behavior and affective commitment. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHannam, R. L., \u0026amp; Jimmieson, N. L. (2002). The relationship between extra-role behaviors and job burnout for primary school teachers: A preliminary model and development of an organizational citizenship behavior scale.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHarwiki, W. (2013). The influence of servant leadership on organization culture, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, and employees\u0026apos; performance. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Economics and Behavioral Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(12), 876-885.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHassan, A., \u0026amp; Jubari, I. H. A. A. (2010). Organizational justice and employee work engagement: LMX as mediator. Journal for International Business and Entrepreneurship Development, 5(2), 167-178.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHo, R. (2006). \u003cem\u003eHandbook of univariate and multivariate data analysis and interpretation with SPSS\u003c/em\u003e. Boca Raton, London \u0026amp; New York. Chapman and Hall/CRC.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIbrahim, M. A., \u0026amp; Aslinda, A. (2013). Relationship between organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) at government-owned corporation companies. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 3(3), 35-42.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eImamoglu, G. (2011). The relationshıp between primary school teachers? Organizational commitment levels and organizational justice. (Unpublished Master Thesis). Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIqbal, H. K., Aziz, U., \u0026amp; Tasawar, A. (2012). Impact of organizational justice on organizational citizenship behavior: An empirical evidence from Pakistan. \u003cem\u003eWorld Applied Sciences Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(9), 1348-1354.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIshak, N. A., \u0026amp; Alam, S. S. (2009). The effects of leader-member exchange on organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: Empirical study. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(2), 324-334.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJafri, M. (2010). Organizational commitment and employee\u0026apos;s innovative behavior. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Management Research (09725814)\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJehanzeb, K., \u0026amp; Mohanty, J. (2019). The mediating role of organizational commitment between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior. \u003cem\u003ePersonnel Review\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJohnson, R. B., \u0026amp; Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. \u003cem\u003eEducational researcher\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(7), 14-26.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJoiner, T. A., \u0026amp; Bakalis, S. (2006). The antecedents of organizational commitment: Australian casual academics. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(6), 439- 452.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKaranja G. W. (2016). \u003cem\u003eEffect of organizational justice on organizational commitment in public secondary schools and Commercial Banks of Kenya. (Doctoral Dissertation: Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKarriker, J. H., \u0026amp; Williams, M. L. (2009). Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: A mediated multi-foci model. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(1), 112-135.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKennedy, D. B., Homant, R. J., \u0026amp; Homant, M. R. (2004). Perception of injustice as a predictor of support for workplace aggression. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business \u0026amp; Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(3), 323-336.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKhan, S. K., \u0026amp; Rashid, M. Z. A. (2012). The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment in the Organizational Culture, Leadership and Organizational Justice Relationship with Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Study of Academicians in Private Higher Learning Institutions in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(8), 83-93.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKıray, A. (2011). An empirical study towards identifying the relationship between organizational justice and organizational commitment. Master\u0026rsquo;s Degree, \u0026Ccedil;anakkale Onsekiz Mart University Institute of Social Sciences, \u0026Ccedil;anakkale, Turkey.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKuswanti, Ningrum, S. \u0026amp; Hamidah, T. (2018). The role of servant leadership in enhancing organizational citizenship behavior through organizational commitment as mediator. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Education, Learning \u0026amp; Development, 6\u003c/em\u003e(9), 98-106.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLee, K., \u0026amp; Allen, N. (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e87\u003c/em\u003e(1), 131.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLilly, J. (2015). The impact of justice type on organizational citizenship behavior: Do outcome favorability and leader behavior matter? \u003cem\u003eCurrent Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(1), 26-49.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLiu, Y. (2009). \u003cem\u003eWhen change leadership impacts commitment to change and when it doesn\u0026apos;t: A multi-level dimensional investigation\u003c/em\u003e (Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMadsen, S. R., Miller, D., \u0026amp; John, C. R. (2005). Readiness for organizational change: do organizational commitment and social relationships in the workplace make a difference? \u003cem\u003eHuman Resource Development Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(2), 213-234.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMarcus, B., \u0026amp; Schuler, H. (2004). Antecedents of counterproductive behavior at work: a general perspective. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e89\u003c/em\u003e(4), 647.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMeyer, J.., Allen, N. \u0026amp; Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: extensions and test of a three-component conceptualization. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Psychology, 78\u003c/em\u003e(4)\u003cstrong\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e 538-555.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMoorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e76\u003c/em\u003e(6), 845.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMulu, N. (2012). Quality and quality assurance in Ethiopian higher education: Critical issues and practical implications. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNastiezaie, N., \u0026amp; Jenaabadi, H. (2016). The Relationship of organizational justice with positive organizational behavior and work engagement from the viewpoint of faculty members of Zahedan University of Medical Sciences.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNiehoff, B. \u0026amp; Moorman, R. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. \u003cem\u003eThe Academy of Management Journal 36(3), 527-556.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOguz, H. (2011). A review from experimental trials on detoxification of aflatoxin in poultry feed. \u003cem\u003eEurasian J Vet Sci\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1-12.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOrgan, D. (1988). \u003cem\u003eOrganizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome.\u003c/em\u003e Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePandey, R., \u0026amp; Verma, M. R. (2008). Samples allocation in different strata for impact evaluation of the developmental program. \u003cem\u003eRev. Mat. Estat\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(4), 103-112.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePolat, S., \u0026amp; Celep, C. (2008). Perceptions of secondary school teachers on organizational justice, organizational trust, organizational citizenship behaviors. \u003cem\u003eEducational Administration: Theory and Practice\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(54), 307-331.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRen-Tao, M., \u0026amp; Heung-Gil, K. (2009). The impact of organizational citizenship behavior on team effectiveness in China: The moderating role of task complexity. Fourth International Conference on Computer Sciences and Convergence IT (pp. 641-646). Seoul.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRobbin, S. P., \u0026amp; Judge, T. A. (2008). Perilaku Organisasi: Organizational Behavior. Jakarta: Salemba Empat.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSalami, S. O., \u0026amp; Omole, O. A. (2005). Participation in decision-making process, incentives, and training as predictors of organizational commitment among industrial workers. \u003cem\u003eAfrican journal for the psychological study of social issues\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(2), 210-227.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSchappe, S. P. (1998). The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and fairness perceptions on organizational citizenship behavior. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e132\u003c/em\u003e(3), 277- 290.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eShekari, G. (2011). Studying the relationship between organizational justice and organizational commitment among the employees of Meezan Financial Institution of Mashhad in the year 2011. M.A thesis. Azad Eslami University of Mashad.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eShin, J., \u0026amp; Sohn, Y. W. (2015). Effects of employees\u0026apos; social comparison behaviors on distributive justice perception and job satisfaction. \u003cem\u003eSocial Behavior and Personality: An International Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e(7), 1071-1083.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSjahruddin, H., \u0026amp; Sudiro, A. A. (2013). Organizational justice, organizational commitment and trust in manager as a predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. \u003cem\u003eInterdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research Business\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e, 4\u003c/em\u003e(12), 133-141.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSpector, P. E., \u0026amp; Che, X. X. (2014). Re-examining citizenship: How the control of measurement artifacts affects observed relationships of organizational citizenship behavior and organizational variables. \u003cem\u003eHuman Performance\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(2), 165-182.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSpector, P. E., \u0026amp; Fox, S. (2002). An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: Some parallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. \u003cem\u003eHuman Resource Management Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(2), 269-292.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTemesgen, T. (2011). \u003cem\u003eThe relationship between Leadership Styles and Employee Commitment in Private Higher Education Institutions at Addis Ababa City.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Master thesis: Addis Ababa University).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTurnipseed, D., \u0026amp; Murkison, G. (2000). Good soldiers and their syndrome: OCB and the work environment. \u003cem\u003eNorth American Journal of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(2), 281.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVardi, Y., \u0026amp; Wiener, Y. (1996). Misbehavior in organizations: A motivational framework. \u003cem\u003eOrganization Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(2), 151-165.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWajdee, M. E., Gurvinder, K., \u0026amp; Shehadehmofleh, A. (2018). Organizational justice and its relationship with organizational citizenship behavior of non-academic staff members at government universities in the north of Jordan. \u003cem\u003eAcademy of Strategic Management Journal, 17\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1-11.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWasti, S. A. (2003). Organizational commitment, turnover intentions and the influence of cultural values. Journal of Occupational \u0026amp; Organizational Psychology, 76(3), 303-\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWilliams, E. S., Rondeau, K. V., \u0026amp; Francescutti, L. H. (2007). Impact of culture on commitment, satisfaction, and extra‐role behaviors among Canadian ER physicians. Leadership in Health Services.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhang, D. (2011). Organizational citizenship behavior. \u003cem\u003eWhite Paper\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"University Of Gondar","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Organizational Commitment, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Organizational Justice, Public Universities","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5941911/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5941911/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of this study was to examine the effect of organizational justice (OJ) on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) through the mediating role of organizational commitment (OC) in the public universities in Amhara region. Explanatory mixed research design was employed. The size of the population was 2170. Of these, 620 instructors were selected as samples using a proportional stratified random sampling technique. Five interviewees took part in the qualitative part of the study. The collected data were analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative techniques. The result of one sample t-test indicated that the mean scores of OC (52.981) and OCB (71.363) were higher than the respective test values of these variables with (t = 15.398) and (t = 5.639) at p \u0026lt; .05, df = 619. On the contrary, the mean score of OJ (43.934) was lower than the test value with (t = -11.987, df = 619) at p \u0026lt; .05. The result of the structural equation modeling (SEM) indicated that there were positive and statistically significant relationships among OJ, OC, and OCB. Concerning the causal relationships, the value of R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e indicated that OJ significantly predicted 44.3% of the variance in OC with a standardized regression coefficient of (β = .667) at p \u0026lt; .05, while 29.2% of the variance in OCB was significantly predicted by the joint effects of OJ and OC with standardized regression coefficients of (β = .341) and (β = .164) respectively at p \u0026lt; .05. Statistically significant differences were found among instructors in their perception of OJ (F = 132.833, p = .000), OC (F = 3.163, p = .024) and OCB (F = 19.071, p = .000) across the four generations of universities. Therefore, it is concluded that OJ had a significant effect on OCB through the mediation of OC. Thus, it is suggested to improve the current status of OJ, OC, and OCB in the research sites.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The effect of organizational Justice on organizational citizenship behavior through the mediating role of Organizational commitment in the Public universities in Amhara region","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-02-11 08:39:06","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5941911/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"3fa3f47e-af8c-45f9-b449-c0dd057416ae","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 11th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":43709319,"name":"Leadership and Ethics"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-02-11T08:39:06+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-02-11 08:39:06","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5941911","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5941911","identity":"rs-5941911","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}