An Examination of the Relationships Between Organizational Support, Trust, Identification, and Commitment Among Disabled Healthcare Workers Employed in Public Hospitals in Turkey

An Examination of the Relationships Between Organizational Support, Trust, Identification, and Commitment Among Disabled Healthcare Workers Employed in Public Hospitals in Turkey | 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 An Examination of the Relationships Between Organizational Support, Trust, Identification, and Commitment Among Disabled Healthcare Workers Employed in Public Hospitals in Turkey Ulku Turkugur, Mevlut Karadag, Ismet Sahin, Bayram Sahin This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8412751/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Objective Despite being a critical but underrepresented workforce component of the healthcare system, disabled healthcare professionals working in the health sector may experience different organizational experiences than other employees due to the structural and psychosocial barriers they face in the work environment. In this context, this study aims to examine the structural relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment among disabled healthcare professionals working in public hospitals in Turkey. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted on 316 disabled healthcare professionals working in 15 public hospitals in Ankara between November 2023 and February 2024. Data were collected using a survey method. The structural validity of the scales used in the research was examined with confirmatory factor analysis, their reliability with the internal consistency coefficient, and the relationships between variables with structural equation modeling. Results It was found that perceived organizational support positively and significantly affected both organizational trust (p < .001; β = 0.808) and organizational commitment (p = .012; β = 0.258); while organizational trust positively and significantly affected both organizational identity (p < .001; β = 0.774) and organizational commitment (p = .016; β = 0.322). Conclusion Strengthening organizational support mechanisms is critical for enabling disabled healthcare professionals to develop positive attitudes towards their organizations. The findings are expected to contribute to the development of inclusive human resources policies in public hospitals and the planning of interventions aimed at improving the organizational well-being of disabled healthcare professionals. Disabled healthcare professionals organizational support organizational trust organizational identification organizational commitment Turkey Figures Figure 1 1. Introduction Disability is a globally significant issue in the areas of equality, inclusion, and sustainability in the world of work. Individuals with disabilities face multifaceted obstacles in their workforce participation processes, including lack of physical accessibility, inadequate adapted working conditions, lack of organizational support, and discriminatory attitudes [ 1 ]. This situation not only limits individuals' employment opportunities but also directly impacts organizations' human resources policies, productivity, and social equality goals. The healthcare sector is a work environment that requires intense human interaction and involves high workloads and stress levels; therefore, employees with disabilities need more organizational support in terms of both job adaptation and retention [ 2 ]. International literature shows that the employment of individuals with disabilities provides significant benefits not only in the context of social justice and human rights, but also in terms of organizational sustainability and performance [ 3 , 4 ]. In Turkey, an amendment to Article 53 of the Civil Servants Law No. 657 mandated the employment of disabled individuals in both the public and private sectors. This amendment made it compulsory for private sector companies with more than fifty employees to employ 3% disabled individuals, and for public institutions and organizations to employ 4%, thus facilitating their participation in the workforce. Despite these regulations, disabled employees continue to face obstacles and discrimination in the labor market related to social exclusion; physical and spatial accessibility; job design and human resources processes; corporate policies; lack of support; promotion and wage structures; legal and administrative practice gaps; and accessibility to information and communication [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. These challenges directly affect not only the psychosocial well-being of employees but also their organizational attitudes and behaviors. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms that determine the relationship between disabled healthcare workers and the organization is crucial for both improving employee welfare and developing more inclusive policies in the human resources management of organizations. In the organizational behavior literature, perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational commitment, and organizational identification stand out as key factors in understanding employee behavior. Perceived organizational support refers to an employee's perception that they are valued by the organization and that their well-being is considered important [ 8 ]. Employees who feel supported by their organizations tend to develop commitment and trust in the organization due to the principle of reciprocity [ 9 ]. Research indicates that working conditions and perceived organizational support among employees with disabilities are associated with key work attitudes—particularly organizational commitment—and that perceived organizational support can strengthen organizational identification processes that are closely linked to commitment [ 10 – 14 ]. Furthermore, organizational support appears to affect not only job performance and organizational citizenship behaviors, but also employees' burnout levels and intentions to leave [ 15 ]. Organizational trust encompasses employees' beliefs that the organization is fair, consistent, and predictable. The literature states that organizational trust is a fundamental psychosocial process that shapes employees' positive attitudes towards the organization [ 16 ]. Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman's (1995) model emphasizes that trust has both cognitive and emotional dimensions in intra-organizational relationships and demonstrates that trust is a significant determinant of organizational commitment and identification [ 17 ]. Employees develop higher commitment and stronger belonging in organizations with a strong trusting environment [ 18 , 19 ]. Organizational identification is a concept based on social identity theory that describes an individual's psychological integration with their organization [ 20 ]. It expresses the level at which an individual perceives themselves as part of the organization, and various studies have reported that a supportive organizational climate increases the sense of belonging [ 13 ]. Employees with high levels of identification view their organization's successes as their own and make stronger contributions to organizational goals. Organizational commitment refers to an individual's emotional connection to their organization, their adoption of the organization's values, and their desire to remain within the organization [ 9 ]. Meta-analysis findings show that organizational commitment (especially emotional commitment) is negatively correlated with intention to leave and actual leaving, while it is positively correlated with outcomes such as attendance/participation, performance, and organizational citizenship behavior [ 21 , 22 ]. Furthermore, another performance-focused study reports a significant positive correlation between attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance [ 23 ]. Recent studies indicate that organizational support and trust-based/inclusive managerial relations are associated with improved job satisfaction, workplace experiences, and performance outcomes among employees with disabilities [ 11 , 24 , 25 ]. Access to workplace social support and structural accommodation mechanisms (e.g., accessibility arrangements, job redesign, flexibility, assistive tools) is consistently associated with more sustainable employment outcomes for employees with disabilities, including maintaining employment and reducing exit intentions [ 26 – 28 ]. Evidence from Türkiye also highlights that accessibility and workplace conditions are central to labor-market integration, and that negative workplace experiences undermine job satisfaction and increase the intention to leave among employees with disabilities [ 27 , 29 ]. In the healthcare sector, disability-focused research shows that accommodations are linked with improved job satisfaction for healthcare workers with disabilities [ 30 ], while reviews emphasize organizational/ableist barriers as key threats to retention for nurses who acquire disabilities—underscoring the importance of inclusive policies and supports for long-term employment [ 31 ]. Since higher clinical staff turnover has been associated with worse patient outcomes, retention-promoting inclusive practices can also contribute to healthcare service quality at the organizational level [ 32 ]. This study aims to fill a gap in the literature by examining the relationship between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment among disabled healthcare professionals working in public hospitals in Turkey. The findings of this research are expected to provide evidence-based recommendations for developing inclusive employment policies in healthcare, improving working environments, and enhancing the organizational well-being of disabled healthcare professionals. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Research design This cross-sectional study was conducted in 15 public hospitals in Ankara between November 2023 and February 2024. 2.2. Research Population and Sample The research population consisted of 1761 disabled healthcare workers employed in a total of 37 hospitals in Ankara, the capital of Türkiye. These hospitals included 11 training and research hospitals, 2 city hospitals, 23 state hospitals, and 1 occupational health hospital affiliated with the Ministry of Health. Applications for official research permits were made to the Ankara Provincial Health Directorate and all public hospitals; however, permits were only granted from 7 training and research hospitals and 8 state hospitals. No sampling method was used for the study; the aim was to reach 587 disabled healthcare workers in the hospitals that received permits, but responses were received from only 316 (53.8%) of them. The study included all disabled healthcare professionals who: (i) had a report indicating a physical or mental disability, (ii) were actively working in authorized hospitals, and (iii) provided informed consent. 2.3. Instruments The survey method was used as a data collection tool in the study. To determine the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants, a personal information form was used; to measure perceptions of organizational support, an 8-item scale developed by Eisenberger et al. [ 8 ], and revised by Shanock and Eisenberger [ 33 ], was used; to measure levels of organizational trust, a 12-item scale developed by Nyhan and Marlowe [ 34 ] was used; to measure levels of organizational identification, a 6-item scale developed by Mael and Ashforth [ 35 ] was used; and to measure organizational commitment, a 4-item scale used in the studies of Babin and Boles [ 36 ], Netemeyer et al. [ 37 ], and Hartline and Ferrell [ 38 ]was used. The Turkish adaptation of these four scales was done by Altaş [ 39 ]. All scales' response categories were based on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree. 2.4. Data collection procedure After the ethical approval process for the research was completed, hospital administrators were consulted and informed about the importance and scope of the study. The survey link was announced to disabled healthcare professionals by the management units of the relevant public hospitals. All participants voluntarily participated in the research and electronically confirmed their informed consent. 2.5. Statistical analysis Research data were analyzed using SPSS 29 and AMOS 24 software. Descriptive analysis of the data obtained from the scales included frequency and percentage analysis, mean, and standard deviation values. The construct validity of the scales used in the research was examined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Direct, indirect, and total effects between the scales were evaluated using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Goodness-of-fit indices were used to assess the performance of the CFA and SEM models. The reliability of the scales was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients. 3. Results 3.1. Scale validity and reliability In the study, the construct validity of the participants' responses to the organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment scales was tested using CFA. The goodness-of-fit indices of the measurement model (χ²/df = 2.41; CFI = .95; GFI = .92; AGFI = .90; TLI = .94; RMSEA = .06; SRMR = .04) were found to be at an acceptable level, and the data confirmed the theoretical structure of the scales (Table 1 ). Table 1 Model Fit Indices and Evaluation Fit index Model value Acceptable thresholds* Interpretation χ²/df 2.41 < 3.00 Good fit CFI 0.96 ≥ 0.90 (good), ≥ 0.95 (excellent) Excellent fit TLI 0.95 ≥ 0.90 (good), ≥ 0.95 (excellent) Good fit RMSEA 0.06 < 0.08 (good), < 0.06 (excellent) Good fit SRMR 0.04 < 0.08 Excellent fit GFI 0.92 ≥ 0.90 Good fit AGFI 0.90 ≥ 0.85 Good fit Note : Acceptable limits are specified based on the compliance criteria of Hu & Bentler [ 40 ], Kline [ 41 ], and Hair et al. [ 42 ]. The findings of the DFA and reliability analysis of the research scales are presented in Table 2 . The factor loadings of the scales ranged from .67 to .97; and the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for reliability assessment ranged from .94 to .98. Table 2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Reliability Findings of Research Scales Item β %95 CI p Cronbach’s α Lower Upper Perceived Organizational Support Scale .941 POS1 0,869 0,820 0,909 < .001 POS2 0,920 0,892 0,944 < .001 POS3 0,935 0,911 0,955 < .001 POS4 0,872 0,816 0,913 < .001 POS5 0,793 0,731 0,844 < .001 POS6 0,865 0,817 0,904 < .001 POS7 0,668 0,558 0,756 < .001 POS8 0,667 0,547 0,766 < .001 Organizational Commitment Scale .952 OC1 0,887 0,816 0,935 < .001 OC2 0,963 0,940 0,982 < .001 OC3 0,907 0,834 0,957 < .001 OC4 0,900 0,845 0,942 < .001 Organizational Identification Scale .939 OI1 0,766 0,633 0,872 < .001 OI2 0,772 0,657 0,860 < .001 OI3 0,893 0,846 0,931 < .001 OI4 0,926 0,889 0,955 < .001 OI5 0,888 0,799 0,948 < .001 OI6 0,847 0,748 0,922 < .001 Organizational Trust Scale .981 Trust in Supervisor Subscale .982 OT1 0,910 0,857 0,948 < .001 OT2 0,949 0,923 0,968 < .001 OT3 0,858 0,760 0,934 < .001 OT4 0,947 0,919 0,967 < .001 OT5 0,942 0,914 0,964 < .001 OT6 0,965 0,946 0,981 < .001 OT7 0,958 0,932 0,978 < .001 OT8 0,942 0,907 0,966 < .001 Trust in the Organization Subscale .951 OT9 0,952 0,914 0,984 < .001 OT10 0,964 0,943 0,983 < .001 OT11 0,818 0,722 0,893 < .001 OT12 0,896 0,846 0,936 < .001 3.2. Participant characteristics A total of 316 disabled healthcare workers participated in the study; their average age was 43.5 ± 8.0, 50.9% were female, 75.6% were married, and 57.6% were university graduates. 59.8% had disabilities due to illness, 66.1% had a Grade 3 disability (40%-59%), and 42.7% had orthopedic-physical disabilities. 90.8% worked in training and research hospitals. The average length of service was 18.5 ± 8.6 years (Table 3 ). Table 3 Sociodemographic and occupational characteristics of participants (n = 316) Characteristic Category n % Age (years) 43,5 ± 8,0 (Mean ± SD) Gender Male 155 49,1 Female 161 50,9 Marital status Single 77 24,4 Married 239 75,6 Educational level Lower secondary school of below 13 4,1 High school 78 24,7 University (Bachelor’s) 182 57,6 Postgraduate 43 13,6 Disability severity First-degree disability (%80-%99) 41 13,0 Second-degree disability (%60-%79) 66 20,9 Third-degree disaility (%40-%59) 209 66,1 Type of disability Orthopedic/physical 135 42,7 Visual impairment 31 9,8 Hearing impairment 33 10,4 Intellectual disability 12 3,8 Chronic illness 102 32,3 Other 3 0,9 Hospital type Training and research hospital 287 90,8 State hospital 29 9,2 Total years of work experience (years) 18,5 ± 8,6 (Mean ± SD) Years in current institution (years) 11,6 ± 7,7 (Mean ± SD) Job title/position Physician 26 8,2 Midwife/Nurse 59 18,7 Technician/Technologist (e.g., health officer, technician/technologist, laboratory technician, medical secretary, radiology technician, dental technician) 65 20,6 Other allied health professionals (e.g., biologist, physicist/engineer, dietitian, physiotherapist, patient care staff, psychologist, support staff, orderly, engineer) 59 18,7 General administrative services (e.g., clerical officer, civil servant, secretary, data entry) 70 22,2 Other (e.g., worker, switchboard operator, cleaning staff) 37 11,7 Are you working in the position to which you were appointed? Yes 288 91,1 No 28 8,9 Overall, are you satisfied with working in this workplace? Yes 281 88,9 No 35 11,1 Do you use assistive devices/equipment related to your disability for your job? Yes 25 7,9 No 291 92,1 Does your institution provide the required assistive devices/equipment? (n = 25) Yes 13 52,0 No 12 48,0 In your opinion, is there a need for physical modifications in your workplace to accommodate your disability? Yes 52 16,5 No 264 83,5 Are you satisfied with your salary? Yes 198 62,7 No 118 37,3 Do you need caregiver support during working hours (e.g., eating/drinking, personal care, mobility assistance)? Yes 15 4,7 No 301 95,3 3.3. Findings regarding participants' levels of organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment The findings regarding the levels of organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment of disabled healthcare workers are presented in Table 4 . Accordingly, it is observed that the average perception of organizational support among disabled healthcare workers is 3.48, the average levels of organizational trust and commitment are 3.67, and the average level of organizational identification is 3.76. Table 4 Organizational attitudes of disabled healthcare workers Variable Number of items Cronbach’s α Min Max Mean (M) SD Perceived Organizational Support 8 .94 1,00 5,00 3,48 0,85 Organizational Trust 12 .98 1,00 5,00 3,67 0,86 Organizational Identification 6 .94 1,00 5,00 3,76 0,77 Organizational Commitment 4 .95 1,00 5,00 3,67 0,90 3.4. Structural Equation Modeling Findings In this study, SEM analysis was conducted to examine the direct and indirect relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment. The model's fit indices (χ²/df = 2.41; CFI = .95; GFI = .92; AGFI = .90; TLI = .94; RMSEA = .06; SRMR = .04) are within acceptable values, and the factor loadings of the scales range from .67 to .97. Red arrows in the model indicate significant effects (Fig. 1 ). According to the findings in Fig. 1 , among disabled healthcare workers, organizational support explains 65.3% of the variance in organizational trust, perceived organizational support and organizational trust explain 69% of the variance in organizational identification, and perceived organizational support, organizational trust, and organizational identification explain 80.2% of the variance in organizational commitment. The analysis findings regarding the direct, indirect, and total effects between the research scales are presented in Table 5 . Table 5 Structural Equation Model Analysis Findings Path B * Β ** SE *** 95% CI for β p Lower Upper Direct Effects Organizational Support → Organizational Trust 0,858 0,808 0,082 0,693 0,904 < .001 Organizational Support → Organizational Identification 0,056 0,069 0,138 -0,309 0,344 0.725 Organizational Support → Organizational Commitment 0,229 0,258 0,103 0,058 0,495 .012 Organizational Trust → Organizational Identification 0,597 0,774 0,146 0,499 1,140 < .001 Organizational Trust → Organizational Commitment 0,269 0,322 0,132 0,055 0,659 .016 Organizational Identification → Organizational Commitment 0,421 0,389 0,122 0,154 0,569 .002 Indirect Effects Organizational Support → Organizational Identification 0,512 0,626 0,163 0,375 1,012 < .001 Organizational Support → Organizational Commitment 0,470 0,530 0,087 0,350 0,699 < .001 Organizational Trust → Organizational Commitment 0,251 0,301 0,092 0,135 0,492 .002 Total Effects Organizational Support → Organizational Trust 0,858 0,808 0,055 0,693 0,904 < .001 Organizational Support → Organizational Identification 0,568 0,694 0,049 0,593 0,784 < .001 Organizational Support → Organizational Commitment 0,698 0,788 0,048 0,685 0,873 < .001 Organizational Trust → Organizational Identification 0,597 0,774 0,164 0,499 1,140 < .001 Organizational Trust → Organizational Commitment 0,520 0,623 0,141 0,334 0,882 < .001 Organizational Identification → Organizational Commitment 0,421 0,389 0,105 0,154 0,569 .002 * Unstandardized regression coefficient (B) ** Standardized regression coefficient (β) *** Standard error (SE) According to the table, when the direct effects between the variables are examined: • Organizational support significantly and positively affects organizational trust (β=0.808; p= < .001) and organizational commitment (β=0.258; p= .012), • Organizational trust significantly and positively affects organizational identification (β=0.774; p= < .001) and organizational commitment (β=0.322; p= .016), • Organizational identification significantly and positively affects organizational commitment (β=0.389; p=.002), • Organizational support has no significant effect on organizational identification (β=0.069; p= 0.725). When the indirect effects between the variables were examined, it was determined that: • Organizational support has a significant positive indirect effect on organizational identification (β=0.626; p=< .001), • Organizational support has a significant positive indirect effect on organizational commitment (β=0.530; p=< .001), • Organizational trust has a significant positive indirect effect on organizational commitment (β=0.301; p= .002). When the total effects between the variables were examined: • The total effect of organizational support on organizational trust (β=0.808; p=< .001), organizational identification (β=0.694; p=< .001), and organizational commitment (β=0.788) was found to be positive and significant, • The total effect of organizational trust on organizational identification (β=0.774; p=< .001) and organizational commitment (β=0.623; p=< .001) was found to be positive and significant, • The total effect of organizational identification on organizational commitment (β=0.389; p=.002) was found to be positive and significant. When the regression coefficients were examined, it was observed that the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects between organizational support and organizational trust were very strong, followed by the relationship between organizational support and organizational commitment, and the relationships between organizational trust and organizational identification. 4. Discussion The findings of this study reveal the levels of organizational support, trust, identification, and commitment among disabled healthcare workers employed in public hospitals in Turkey, and the structural relationships between these concepts. The results show that when disabled employees perceive high levels of support from their organizations, they feel more trust and a sense of belonging to their institutions, and this feeling of trust increases their organizational identification and commitment. International studies show that inclusive workplace practices for disabled employees improve both employee well-being and organizational performance [ 43 ]. Furthermore, this finding of the study is consistent with classical organizational behavior approaches that emphasize that the employee-organization relationship is a long-term psychological commitment process [ 44 ]. The findings of this study reveal that employees' perceptions that the organization supports, protects, and values their contributions significantly strengthen trust in the organization. Structural equation modeling (SEM) results show that organizational trust is not only a consequence of perceived organizational support but also functions as a critical mediator in the relationship between organizational support and organizational commitment and organizational identification. This provides important insights into how employees interpret organizational relationships, particularly in work environments requiring high workloads, uncertainty, and emotional labor, such as the healthcare sector. The influence of perceived organizational support on organizational commitment and identification through trust is also consistent with the reciprocity mechanism predicted by social exchange theory. Employees perceive the organization's supportive and protective attitudes towards them as an indicator of psychological safety, and this perception results in a stronger emotional attachment to the organization and the adoption of organizational identity. Indeed, Elamin [ 45 ] showed that perceived organizational support significantly increases organizational trust and that organizational trust plays a strong mediating role on emotional commitment The findings of the present study contribute to the literature by revealing that this relationship is not limited to commitment alone, but also encompasses deeper and longer-term attitudes such as organizational identification. Another important finding of the study is that organizational trust has a direct and significant effect on both organizational identification and organizational commitment. As employees' trust in their organizations increases, their perception of themselves as part of the organization strengthens, and they embrace organizational goals more readily. This demonstrates that trust is not only an individual attitude but also a fundamental psychosocial mechanism that enables employees to integrate with the corporate identity and develop long-term loyalty to the organization. Especially in fields requiring high responsibility, ethical sensitivity, and team-based work, such as healthcare, this direct effect of organizational trust plays a critical role in employee well-being and organizational continuity. These findings are consistent with current literature that reveals the decisive influence of organizational trust on organizational identification and commitment. Indeed, Li et al. [ 46 ] showed that organizational trust is strongly related to organizational identification and organizational commitment, and that these structures, when considered together, offer a central explanatory framework for understanding employees' attitudes and behaviors. The results of the present study reveal that these relationships are also valid in the context of the health sector, emphasizing that trust-based organizational structures have strategic importance in strengthening employee commitment and corporate belonging from a public health perspective. The findings from the structural equation model (SEM) show that organizational support strengthens commitment and identification through trust. This finding suggests that trust is not only a “positive perception” but also a fundamental psychosocial resource that accelerates employees’ psychological connection with the organization and their adoption of organizational goals. As the feeling of trust strengthens, employees’ tendencies to define themselves as part of the organization (identification) and their orientation to remain in the organization/strive for the organization (commitment) increase; this points to a mechanism that can indirectly contribute to organizational resilience and service quality in areas where high responsibility and team-based functioning are key, such as healthcare. This assessment is consistent with recent findings showing that organizational trust is significantly related to organizational identity and organizational commitment, and that these constructs, when considered together, offer a powerful framework for explaining employee attitudes [ 47 ]. The four-dimensional structure of the research sheds light on the development of inclusive management policies in healthcare institutions. The healthcare sector, with its high-stress and constantly interactive nature, is particularly sensitive to employees' perceptions of organizational support. In this context, in institutions where disabled healthcare workers are supported physically and psychologically, feelings of trust and commitment are strengthened; this directly and positively impacts patient safety, team cohesion, and service quality. This result demonstrates that organizational support is closely related not only to individual well-being but also to institutional performance and sustainability. Furthermore, the scope of the research is not only behavioral but also includes ethical and social dimensions. The invisible barriers that disabled individuals face in working life are not only physical but also psychological and cultural. In this context, developing a supportive and inclusive organizational culture means internalizing social justice at the institutional level. Limitations and Future Research There are some limitations to consider when evaluating the findings of this research. First, the study was conducted using a cross-sectional research design. This limits the capacity to make inferences about the direction and causality of the relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment. Future longitudinal studies are needed to reveal the evolution of relationships between variables over time and possible cause-and-effect dynamics. Secondly, the study sample is limited to disabled healthcare workers employed in public hospitals in Ankara province. The organizational structure, operation, and human resources practices of public hospitals may differ from those in other regions of Turkey or from private healthcare institutions. Therefore, the generalizability of the findings to different regions or private healthcare institutions may be limited. Thirdly, since participants' responses to the scales reflect their perceptions, future studies could strengthen the evidence by considering objective data from managers, colleagues, or organizational records. Finally, the exclusion of variables such as organizational climate, leadership style, relationships with colleagues, workload, and physical working conditions from the study's structural equation model may have significantly limited the explanation of organizational support, trust, identification, and commitment among disabled healthcare workers. Furthermore, disabled employees feeling valued in the workplace can improve their performance and job satisfaction, while perceptions of discrimination, injustice, and insufficient support can trigger organizational alienation and burnout. Therefore, supportive leadership, fair reward systems, a feedback culture, and trust-based communication strategies are essential for the sustainability of organizational health. Including these variables in future research can lead to a better understanding of the factors affecting organizational support, trust, identification, and commitment among disabled healthcare professionals. 5. Conclusion This study fills a significant gap in the literature by revealing the structural relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment among disabled healthcare professionals working in public hospitals in Turkey. The findings show that organizational support strengthens organizational trust through direct and indirect means; and that trust plays a decisive role in organizational identification and commitment. In particular, the strong influence of organizational trust on both identification and commitment reveals that a trust-based mechanism is central to the psychological bond that disabled healthcare professionals establish with their organizations. From a public health perspective, these results suggest that inclusive and supportive organizational climates indirectly affect not only employee well-being but also the continuity of healthcare services, team cohesion, and service quality. In this context, strengthening organizational support mechanisms for disabled healthcare workers in public hospitals, adopting trust-based management approaches, and widespread implementation of inclusive human resources policies should be among the strategic priorities for a sustainable and equitable healthcare system. Declarations Ethical approval This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and received ethical approval form the Lokman Hekim University Scientific Research Ethics Committee (Approval No: 2023/9; 20 September 2023). Consent to participate All participants provided informed consent prior to participation in the research. Consent to publication Yes. Clinical trial number Not applicable. Funding No funds were received for this study. Author Contribution All authors actively contributed to all stages of the research process.UT contributed to the development of the research idea, literature review, data collection process, data analysis, interpretation of the results, and drafting of the initial manuscript.MK contributed to the conceptualization of the study, research design, statistical analyses, execution of the structural equation modeling, interpretation of the findings, and preparation of the final version of the manuscript.IS contributed to the development of the research methodology, evaluation of the measurement instruments, interpretation of analytical results, and provided critical academic input to the manuscript.BS contributed to the critical review of the scientific content, evaluation from a public health and health management perspective, strengthening of the discussion section, and substantial intellectual revision of the manuscript. Data Availability This study is derived from a master's thesis completed in the Department of Health Management at Lokman Hekim University Institute of Health Sciences. The author confirms that all data generated or analyzed in that thesis are included in this published article. Furthermore, primary and secondary sources and data supporting the findings of this study were publicly available at the time the article was submitted. References Zappella E. (2017). Workplace inclusion of employees with disabilities. Special Educational needs and Inclusive Practices. An ınternational Perspective. Fabio Dovigo, editor Sense Publishers. 217–239. Teborg S, Hünefeld L, Gerdes TS. Exploring the working conditions of disabled employees: a scoping review. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2024;19:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-023-00397-z . United Nations. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A/RES/61/106. United Nations; 2006. Lindsay S, Cagliostro E, Albarico M, Mortaji N, Karon L. (2018). A systematic review of the benefits of hiring people with disabilities. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 28 (4), 634–655. **doi:**10.1007/s10926-018-9756-z. T.C. Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı, Engelli ve Yaşlı Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü. (2015). Kamuda engelli istihdamının analizi. Aslan H, Karaalp-Orhan HS. Türkiye işgücü piyasasında engelli istihdamına yönelik ayrımcılık: Talep yönlü bir analiz. Çalışma İlişkileri Dergisi. 2021;12(1):24–54. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cider/issue/60414/776888 . Kahraman S, Bulut C, Aydin E. Disability-accessibility at workplace: A research from Turkey. Bus Econ Res J. 2019;10(4):1005–13. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2019.216 . Eisenberger R, Huntington R, Hutchison S, Sowa D. Perceived organizational support. J Appl Psychol. 1986;71(3):500–7. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500 . Meyer JP, Allen NJ. A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Hum Resource Manage Rev. 1991;1(1):61–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z . Bitew TA. Working conditions, perceived organizational support and organizational commitment of employees with disabilities in Gondar city public sectors. Eur Online J Nat Social Sci. 2023;12(1):53–68. https://european-science.com/eojnss/article/download/6548/3078 . Coll C, Mignonac K. Perceived organizational support and task performance of employees with disabilities: A need satisfaction and social identity perspectives. Int J Hum Resource Manage. 2023;34(10):2039–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2022.2054284 . Marique G, Stinglhamber F, Desmette D, Caesens G, De Zanet F. The relationship between perceived organizational support and affective commitment: A social identity perspective. Group Organ Manage. 2013;38(1):68–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601112457200 . Riketta M. Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. J Vocat Behav. 2005;66(2):358–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2004.05.005 . Shen Y, Jackson T, Ding C, Yuan D, Zhao L, Dou Y, Zhang Q. Linking perceived organizational support with employee work outcomes in a Chinese context: Organizational identification as a mediator. Eur Manag J. 2014;32(3):406–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.08.004 . Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J Organizational Behav. 2004;25:293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248 . Dirks KT, Ferrin DL. Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. J Appl Psychol. 2002;87(4):611–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611 . Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD. An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manage Rev. 1995;20(3):709–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/258792 . Tanğ Y, Çakır Ö. Örgütsel güvenin, örgütsel bağlılık ve işten ayrılma niyeti ile ilişkisinin meta analiz yöntemiyle incelenmesi. 19 Mayıs Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2023;4(4):209–29. https://doi.org/10.52835/19maysbd.1351409 . Al-Shalabi FS. The relationship between organisational trust and organisational identification and its effect on organisational loyalty. Int J Econ Bus Res. 2019;18(1):1–30. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEBR.2019.100646 . Ashforth BE, Mael F. Social identity theory and the organization. Acad Manage Rev. 1989;14(1):20–39. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4278999 . Mathieu JE, Zajac DM. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychol Bull. 1990;108(2):171–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.171 . Meyer JP, Stanley DJ, Herscovitch L, Topolnytsky L. Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. J Vocat Behav. 2002;61(1):20–52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842 . Riketta M. Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. J Organizational Behav. 2002;23:257–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.141 . Shantz A, Wang J, Malik AR. Disability status, individual variable pay, and pay satisfaction: Does relational and institutional trust make a difference? Hum Resour Manag. 2018;57(1):365–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21845 . Erkal P. Inclusive manager behaviors in organizations: A qualitative research on disabled public employees. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi. 2024;25(2):153–71. https://doi.org/10.24889/ifede.1538213 . Wong J, Shaw L, Chan F, Iwanaga K, Strauser DR, McMahon BT. Job accommodations, return to work and job retention of people with physical disabilities: A systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31(3):474–90. 10.1007/s10926-020-09954-3 . Kahraman S, Bulut C, Aydın E. Disability-accessibility at workplace: A research from Turkey. Bus Econ Res J. 2019;10(4):1005–13. 10.20409/berj.2019.216 . Kim EJ, Kim I, Kim MJ. The impact of workplace disability facilities on job retention wishes among people with physical disabilities in South Korea. Sustainability. 2020;12(18):7489. 10.3390/su12187489 . Tilki Özcan ZT, Güney S, Metin Camgöz S. Yıldırma, örgütsel sinizm, iş doyumu ve işten ayrılma niyeti ilişkilerinde seri aracılık etkileri: Örgütlerde engelli çalışanlar üzerine bir araştırma. Psikoloji Çalışmaları. 2021;41(1):199–229. 10.26650/SP2020-0008 . van der Rodgers M, Schur Y, Hammond L, Edwards FM, Cohen R, J., Kruse D. Disability, job satisfaction, and workplace accommodations: Evidence from the healthcare industry. J Occup Rehabilitation Adv online publication. 2025. 10.1007/s10926-025-10316-0 . Cameron VK, Jones M, Lee S, McNelis AM. Barriers to retention of nurses with acquired disability: A scoping review. Nurs Manag. 2024;55(3):8–16. 10.1097/NMG.0000000000000101 . Moscelli G, Mello MM, Sayli M, Boyle A. Nurse and doctor turnover and patient outcomes in NHS acute trusts in England: Retrospective longitudinal study. BMJ. 2024;387:e079987. 10.1136/bmj-2024-079987 . Shanock LR, Eisenberger R. When supervisors feel supported: Relationships with subordinates' perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and performance. J Appl Psychol. 2006;91(3):689–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.689 . Nyhan RC, Marlowe HA. Development and Psychometric Properties of the Organizational Trust Inventory. Eval Rev. 1997;21(5):614–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9702100505 . Mael F, Ashforth BE. Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. J Organizational Behav. 1992;13(2):103–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202 . Babin BJ, Boles JS. Employee behavior in a service environment: A model and test of potential differences between men and women. J Mark. 1998;62(2):77–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252162 . Netemeyer RG, Boles JS, McKee DO, McMurrian R. An Investigation into the Antecedents of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in a Personal Selling Context. J Mark. 1997;61(3):85–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251791 . Hartline MD, Ferrell OC. The Management of Customer-Contact Service Employees: An Empirical Investigation. J Mark. 1996;60:52–70. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251901 . Altaş SS. Sağlık çalışanlarının örgütsel özdeşleşme, örgütsel bağlılık, örgütsel güven ve örgütsel destek algıları arasındaki ilişkiler. İşletme araştırmaları dergisi. 2021;13(1):875–91. https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2021.1171 . Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Modeling: Multidisciplinary J. 1999;6(1):1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 . Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 4th ed. The Guilford Press; 2015. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 8th ed. Cengage Learning; 2019. Schur L, Nishii L, Adya M, Kruse D, Bruyere SM, Blanck P. Accommodating employees with and without disabilities. Hum Resour Manag. 2014;53(4):593–621. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21607 . Mowday RT, Porter LW, Steers RM. Employee–organization linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic; 1982. Elamin AM. Exploring the relationship between perceived organizational support and affective commitment among Saudi employees: The mediating effect of organizational trust. Business: Theory Pract. 2024;25(2):434–46. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2024.16845 . Li Y, Liu Z, Qin K, Cui J, Zeng X, Ji M, Lan J, You X, Li Y. Organizational trust and safety operation behavior in airline pilots: The mediating effects of organizational identification and organizational commitment. J Air Transp Manage. 2021;92:102018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102018 . Shie E-H, Chang S-H. Perceived principal’s authentic leadership impact on the organizational citizenship behavior and well-being of teachers. SAGE Open. 2022;12(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221095003 . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 04 Feb, 2026 Reviews received at journal 26 Jan, 2026 Reviews received at journal 23 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 20 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Jan, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 12 Jan, 2026 Editor invited by journal 23 Dec, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 22 Dec, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 22 Dec, 2025 First submitted to journal 20 Dec, 2025 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-8412751","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":573228499,"identity":"66136251-42a5-484a-8d5e-a445b55afade","order_by":0,"name":"Ulku Turkugur","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Gulhane Training and Research Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ulku","middleName":"","lastName":"Turkugur","suffix":""},{"id":573228501,"identity":"c8af5fc2-4b14-4fdb-9d27-3c4e6630abfa","order_by":1,"name":"Mevlut Karadag","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Lokman Hekim University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mevlut","middleName":"","lastName":"Karadag","suffix":""},{"id":573228502,"identity":"f5e35b68-d53d-4762-9d53-01b9060f42fb","order_by":2,"name":"Ismet Sahin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Lokman Hekim University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ismet","middleName":"","lastName":"Sahin","suffix":""},{"id":573228503,"identity":"336ebc3f-063d-4e11-833d-73acb6059668","order_by":3,"name":"Bayram Sahin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Lokman Hekim University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Bayram","middleName":"","lastName":"Sahin","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-12-20 14:23:37","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8412751/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8412751/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":100201911,"identity":"2ce2acc3-8e0c-441b-9b17-95449d2e0ffd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-14 05:20:03","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":251593,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Manuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/1e1eb2f70cbf5b57cfd66094.docx"},{"id":100201908,"identity":"8837d967-e719-43c9-9525-e71d04291338","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-14 05:20:03","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":7197,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"25f4f5d8d8404131b6a6c6ec97651975.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/1258a58befcffd4e18e9dd0c.json"},{"id":100201913,"identity":"688b1557-6e64-4a53-95cc-a4d50d0583ca","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-14 05:20:03","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":150491,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"25f4f5d8d8404131b6a6c6ec976519751enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/77579cd484695abea180c2e8.xml"},{"id":100369305,"identity":"e03c892b-dc09-476d-a942-bafd748d8e2d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:58:53","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":26418,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/5678db0419497b422ca9ed21.png"},{"id":100370740,"identity":"08239fcc-147e-4b1c-8d17-cedf59b1939b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 08:07:37","extension":"xml","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":151064,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"25f4f5d8d8404131b6a6c6ec976519751structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/86f52baa69e641a53f941676.xml"},{"id":100201910,"identity":"ff6c2ce2-29cd-413d-ae56-1b043261b913","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-14 05:20:03","extension":"html","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":163934,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/f650be6b8bc5ce5dea2cbefd.html"},{"id":100201907,"identity":"cfc0f669-9b98-476a-aa67-896b863385f8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-14 05:20:03","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":175772,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStructural Equation Model\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/e127ae3ee6077e02837623a7.png"},{"id":100383386,"identity":"feb53106-1732-43d6-94cf-9810423a68f6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 10:46:48","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1389828,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8412751/v1/43fd08ff-3d18-48f8-a59e-a20d04f83921.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"An Examination of the Relationships Between Organizational Support, Trust, Identification, and Commitment Among Disabled Healthcare Workers Employed in Public Hospitals in Turkey","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eDisability is a globally significant issue in the areas of equality, inclusion, and sustainability in the world of work. Individuals with disabilities face multifaceted obstacles in their workforce participation processes, including lack of physical accessibility, inadequate adapted working conditions, lack of organizational support, and discriminatory attitudes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. This situation not only limits individuals' employment opportunities but also directly impacts organizations' human resources policies, productivity, and social equality goals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe healthcare sector is a work environment that requires intense human interaction and involves high workloads and stress levels; therefore, employees with disabilities need more organizational support in terms of both job adaptation and retention [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. International literature shows that the employment of individuals with disabilities provides significant benefits not only in the context of social justice and human rights, but also in terms of organizational sustainability and performance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Turkey, an amendment to Article 53 of the Civil Servants Law No. 657 mandated the employment of disabled individuals in both the public and private sectors. This amendment made it compulsory for private sector companies with more than fifty employees to employ 3% disabled individuals, and for public institutions and organizations to employ 4%, thus facilitating their participation in the workforce. Despite these regulations, disabled employees continue to face obstacles and discrimination in the labor market related to social exclusion; physical and spatial accessibility; job design and human resources processes; corporate policies; lack of support; promotion and wage structures; legal and administrative practice gaps; and accessibility to information and communication [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. These challenges directly affect not only the psychosocial well-being of employees but also their organizational attitudes and behaviors. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms that determine the relationship between disabled healthcare workers and the organization is crucial for both improving employee welfare and developing more inclusive policies in the human resources management of organizations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the organizational behavior literature, perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational commitment, and organizational identification stand out as key factors in understanding employee behavior. Perceived organizational support refers to an employee's perception that they are valued by the organization and that their well-being is considered important [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]. Employees who feel supported by their organizations tend to develop commitment and trust in the organization due to the principle of reciprocity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. Research indicates that working conditions and perceived organizational support among employees with disabilities are associated with key work attitudes\u0026mdash;particularly organizational commitment\u0026mdash;and that perceived organizational support can strengthen organizational identification processes that are closely linked to commitment [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11 CR12 CR13\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, organizational support appears to affect not only job performance and organizational citizenship behaviors, but also employees' burnout levels and intentions to leave [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational trust encompasses employees' beliefs that the organization is fair, consistent, and predictable. The literature states that organizational trust is a fundamental psychosocial process that shapes employees' positive attitudes towards the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]. Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman's (1995) model emphasizes that trust has both cognitive and emotional dimensions in intra-organizational relationships and demonstrates that trust is a significant determinant of organizational commitment and identification [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. Employees develop higher commitment and stronger belonging in organizations with a strong trusting environment [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational identification is a concept based on social identity theory that describes an individual's psychological integration with their organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. It expresses the level at which an individual perceives themselves as part of the organization, and various studies have reported that a supportive organizational climate increases the sense of belonging [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. Employees with high levels of identification view their organization's successes as their own and make stronger contributions to organizational goals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational commitment refers to an individual's emotional connection to their organization, their adoption of the organization's values, and their desire to remain within the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. Meta-analysis findings show that organizational commitment (especially emotional commitment) is negatively correlated with intention to leave and actual leaving, while it is positively correlated with outcomes such as attendance/participation, performance, and organizational citizenship behavior [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, another performance-focused study reports a significant positive correlation between attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecent studies indicate that organizational support and trust-based/inclusive managerial relations are associated with improved job satisfaction, workplace experiences, and performance outcomes among employees with disabilities [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Access to workplace social support and structural accommodation mechanisms (e.g., accessibility arrangements, job redesign, flexibility, assistive tools) is consistently associated with more sustainable employment outcomes for employees with disabilities, including maintaining employment and reducing exit intentions [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR27\" citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. Evidence from T\u0026uuml;rkiye also highlights that accessibility and workplace conditions are central to labor-market integration, and that negative workplace experiences undermine job satisfaction and increase the intention to leave among employees with disabilities [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e]. In the healthcare sector, disability-focused research shows that accommodations are linked with improved job satisfaction for healthcare workers with disabilities [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e], while reviews emphasize organizational/ableist barriers as key threats to retention for nurses who acquire disabilities\u0026mdash;underscoring the importance of inclusive policies and supports for long-term employment [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. Since higher clinical staff turnover has been associated with worse patient outcomes, retention-promoting inclusive practices can also contribute to healthcare service quality at the organizational level [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study aims to fill a gap in the literature by examining the relationship between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment among disabled healthcare professionals working in public hospitals in Turkey. The findings of this research are expected to provide evidence-based recommendations for developing inclusive employment policies in healthcare, improving working environments, and enhancing the organizational well-being of disabled healthcare professionals.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Research design\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis cross-sectional study was conducted in 15 public hospitals in Ankara between November 2023 and February 2024.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Research Population and Sample\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe research population consisted of 1761 disabled healthcare workers employed in a total of 37 hospitals in Ankara, the capital of T\u0026uuml;rkiye. These hospitals included 11 training and research hospitals, 2 city hospitals, 23 state hospitals, and 1 occupational health hospital affiliated with the Ministry of Health. Applications for official research permits were made to the Ankara Provincial Health Directorate and all public hospitals; however, permits were only granted from 7 training and research hospitals and 8 state hospitals. No sampling method was used for the study; the aim was to reach 587 disabled healthcare workers in the hospitals that received permits, but responses were received from only 316 (53.8%) of them.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study included all disabled healthcare professionals who: (i) had a report indicating a physical or mental disability, (ii) were actively working in authorized hospitals, and (iii) provided informed consent.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Instruments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe survey method was used as a data collection tool in the study. To determine the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants, a personal information form was used; to measure perceptions of organizational support, an 8-item scale developed by Eisenberger et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e], and revised by Shanock and Eisenberger [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e], was used; to measure levels of organizational trust, a 12-item scale developed by Nyhan and Marlowe [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e] was used; to measure levels of organizational identification, a 6-item scale developed by Mael and Ashforth [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e] was used; and to measure organizational commitment, a 4-item scale used in the studies of Babin and Boles [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e], Netemeyer et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e], and Hartline and Ferrell [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]was used. The Turkish adaptation of these four scales was done by Altaş [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll scales' response categories were based on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Strongly Disagree to 5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Strongly Agree.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Data collection procedure\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e After the ethical approval process for the research was completed, hospital administrators were consulted and informed about the importance and scope of the study. The survey link was announced to disabled healthcare professionals by the management units of the relevant public hospitals. All participants voluntarily participated in the research and electronically confirmed their informed consent.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5. Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch data were analyzed using SPSS 29 and AMOS 24 software. Descriptive analysis of the data obtained from the scales included frequency and percentage analysis, mean, and standard deviation values. The construct validity of the scales used in the research was examined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Direct, indirect, and total effects between the scales were evaluated using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Goodness-of-fit indices were used to assess the performance of the CFA and SEM models. The reliability of the scales was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Scale validity and reliability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the study, the construct validity of the participants' responses to the organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment scales was tested using CFA. The goodness-of-fit indices of the measurement model (χ\u0026sup2;/df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.41; CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.95; GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.92; AGFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.90; TLI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.94; RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.06; SRMR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.04) were found to be at an acceptable level, and the data confirmed the theoretical structure of the scales (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel Fit Indices and Evaluation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFit index\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcceptable thresholds*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterpretation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ\u0026sup2;/df\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.41\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;3.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGood fit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.96\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;0.90 (good), \u0026ge; 0.95 (excellent)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExcellent fit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTLI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.95\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;0.90 (good), \u0026ge; 0.95 (excellent)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGood fit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRMSEA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.06\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.08 (good), \u0026lt; 0.06 (excellent)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGood fit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSRMR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.04\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExcellent fit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.92\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;0.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGood fit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAGFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.90\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;0.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGood fit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eNote\u003c/b\u003e: \u003cem\u003eAcceptable limits are specified based on the compliance criteria of Hu \u0026amp; Bentler\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e], \u003cem\u003eKline\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e], \u003cem\u003eand Hair et al.\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of the DFA and reliability analysis of the research scales are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. The factor loadings of the scales ranged from .67 to .97; and the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for reliability assessment ranged from .94 to .98.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConfirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Reliability Findings of Research Scales\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eItem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eβ\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%95 CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePerceived Organizational Support Scale\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"8\" rowspan=\"9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.941\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,869\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,820\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,909\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,920\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,892\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,944\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,935\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,911\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,955\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,872\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,816\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,913\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,793\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,731\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,844\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,865\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,817\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,904\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,668\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,558\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,756\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePOS8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,667\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,547\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,766\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOrganizational Commitment Scale\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.952\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOC1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,887\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,816\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,935\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOC2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,963\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,940\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,982\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOC3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,907\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,834\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,957\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOC4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,900\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,845\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,942\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOrganizational Identification Scale\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"6\" rowspan=\"7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.939\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOI1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,766\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,633\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,872\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOI2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,772\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,657\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,860\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOI3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,893\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,846\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,931\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOI4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,926\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,889\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,955\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOI5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,888\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,799\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,948\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOI6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,847\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,748\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,922\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOrganizational Trust Scale\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.981\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrust in Supervisor Subscale\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"8\" rowspan=\"9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.982\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,910\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,857\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,948\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,949\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,923\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,968\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,858\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,760\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,934\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,947\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,919\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,967\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,942\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,914\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,964\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,965\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,946\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,981\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,958\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,932\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,978\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,942\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,907\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,966\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrust in the Organization Subscale\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.951\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,952\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,914\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,984\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,964\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,943\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,983\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,818\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,722\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,893\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOT12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,896\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,846\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,936\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Participant characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 316 disabled healthcare workers participated in the study; their average age was 43.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.0, 50.9% were female, 75.6% were married, and 57.6% were university graduates. 59.8% had disabilities due to illness, 66.1% had a Grade 3 disability (40%-59%), and 42.7% had orthopedic-physical disabilities. 90.8% worked in training and research hospitals. The average length of service was 18.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.6 years (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSociodemographic and occupational characteristics of participants (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;316)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacteristic\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003en\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge (years)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43,5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8,0 (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e155\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49,1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e161\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50,9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarital status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSingle\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24,4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarried\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e239\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75,6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducational level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower secondary school of below\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4,1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh school\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24,7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUniversity (Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e182\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e57,6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePostgraduate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13,6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisability severity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst-degree disability (%80-%99)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13,0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond-degree disability (%60-%79)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20,9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird-degree disaility (%40-%59)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e209\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66,1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType of disability\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrthopedic/physical\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e135\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42,7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVisual impairment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9,8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHearing impairment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10,4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntellectual disability\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChronic illness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e102\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32,3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHospital type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTraining and research hospital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e287\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90,8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eState hospital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9,2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal years of work experience (years)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18,5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8,6 (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYears in current institution (years)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11,6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7,7 (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJob title/position\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePhysician\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8,2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMidwife/Nurse\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18,7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTechnician/Technologist (e.g., health officer, technician/technologist, laboratory technician, medical secretary, radiology technician, dental technician)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20,6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther allied health professionals (e.g., biologist, physicist/engineer, dietitian, physiotherapist, patient care staff, psychologist, support staff, orderly, engineer)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18,7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeneral administrative services (e.g., clerical officer, civil servant, secretary, data entry)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22,2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther (e.g., worker, switchboard operator, cleaning staff)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11,7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre you working in the position to which you were appointed?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e288\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e91,1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8,9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, are you satisfied with working in this workplace?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e281\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88,9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11,1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDo you use assistive devices/equipment related to your disability for your job?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7,9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e291\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e92,1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDoes your institution provide the required assistive devices/equipment? (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;25)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52,0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48,0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn your opinion, is there a need for physical modifications in your workplace to accommodate your disability?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16,5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e264\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83,5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre you satisfied with your salary?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e198\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62,7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e118\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37,3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDo you need caregiver support during working hours (e.g., eating/drinking, personal care, mobility assistance)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4,7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e301\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95,3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Findings regarding participants' levels of organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings regarding the levels of organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment of disabled healthcare workers are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. Accordingly, it is observed that the average perception of organizational support among disabled healthcare workers is 3.48, the average levels of organizational trust and commitment are 3.67, and the average level of organizational identification is 3.76.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational attitudes of disabled healthcare workers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of items\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMax\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean (M)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Organizational Support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Trust\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Identification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3,67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Structural Equation Modeling Findings\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this study, SEM analysis was conducted to examine the direct and indirect relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment. The model's fit indices (χ\u0026sup2;/df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.41; CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.95; GFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.92; AGFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.90; TLI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.94; RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.06; SRMR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.04) are within acceptable values, and the factor loadings of the scales range from .67 to .97. Red arrows in the model indicate significant effects (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the findings in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, among disabled healthcare workers, organizational support explains 65.3% of the variance in organizational trust, perceived organizational support and organizational trust explain 69% of the variance in organizational identification, and perceived organizational support, organizational trust, and organizational identification explain 80.2% of the variance in organizational commitment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe analysis findings regarding the direct, indirect, and total effects between the research scales are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStructural Equation Model Analysis Findings\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePath\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eB *\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eΒ **\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSE ***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% CI for β\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDirect Effects\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Trust\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,858\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,808\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,082\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,693\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,904\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Identification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,056\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,069\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,138\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0,309\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,344\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.725\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,229\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,258\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,103\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,058\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,495\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Trust \u0026rarr; Organizational Identification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,597\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,774\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,146\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,499\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,140\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Trust \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,269\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,322\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,132\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,055\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,659\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.016\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Identification \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,421\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,389\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,122\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,154\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,569\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIndirect Effects\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Identification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,512\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,626\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,163\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,375\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,470\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,530\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,087\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,350\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,699\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Trust \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,251\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,301\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,092\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,135\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,492\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTotal Effects\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Trust\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,858\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,808\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,055\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,693\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,904\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Identification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,568\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,694\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,049\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,593\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,784\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Support \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,698\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,788\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,048\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,685\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,873\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Trust \u0026rarr; Organizational Identification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,597\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,774\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,164\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,499\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,140\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Trust \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,520\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,623\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,141\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,334\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,882\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational Identification \u0026rarr; Organizational Commitment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,421\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,389\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,105\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,154\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0,569\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e* Unstandardized regression coefficient (B)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e** Standardized regression coefficient (β)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e\u003cem\u003e*** Standard error (SE)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the table, when the \u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003edirect effects\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e between the variables are examined:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Organizational support significantly and positively affects organizational trust (\u0026beta;=0.808; p= \u0026lt; .001) and organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.258; p= .012),\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Organizational trust significantly and positively affects organizational identification (\u0026beta;=0.774; p= \u0026lt; .001) and organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.322; p= .016),\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Organizational identification significantly and positively affects organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.389; p=.002),\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Organizational support has no significant effect on organizational identification (\u0026beta;=0.069; p= 0.725).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen the \u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eindirect effects\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e between the variables were examined, it was determined that:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Organizational support has a significant positive indirect effect on organizational identification (\u0026beta;=0.626; p=\u0026lt; .001),\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Organizational support has a significant positive indirect effect on organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.530; p=\u0026lt; .001),\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Organizational trust has a significant positive indirect effect on organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.301; p= .002).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen the \u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003etotal effects\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e between the variables were examined:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; The total effect of organizational support on organizational trust (\u0026beta;=0.808; p=\u0026lt; .001), organizational identification (\u0026beta;=0.694; p=\u0026lt; .001), and organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.788) was found to be positive and significant,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; The total effect of organizational trust on organizational identification (\u0026beta;=0.774; p=\u0026lt; .001) and organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.623; p=\u0026lt; .001) was found to be positive and significant,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; The total effect of organizational identification on organizational commitment (\u0026beta;=0.389; p=.002) was found to be positive and significant.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen the regression coefficients were examined, it was observed that the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects between organizational support and organizational trust were very strong, followed by the relationship between organizational support and organizational commitment, and the relationships between organizational trust and organizational identification.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study reveal the levels of organizational support, trust, identification, and commitment among disabled healthcare workers employed in public hospitals in Turkey, and the structural relationships between these concepts. The results show that when disabled employees perceive high levels of support from their organizations, they feel more trust and a sense of belonging to their institutions, and this feeling of trust increases their organizational identification and commitment. International studies show that inclusive workplace practices for disabled employees improve both employee well-being and organizational performance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, this finding of the study is consistent with classical organizational behavior approaches that emphasize that the employee-organization relationship is a long-term psychological commitment process [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study reveal that employees' perceptions that the organization supports, protects, and values their contributions significantly strengthen trust in the organization. Structural equation modeling (SEM) results show that organizational trust is not only a consequence of perceived organizational support but also functions as a critical mediator in the relationship between organizational support and organizational commitment and organizational identification. This provides important insights into how employees interpret organizational relationships, particularly in work environments requiring high workloads, uncertainty, and emotional labor, such as the healthcare sector. The influence of perceived organizational support on organizational commitment and identification through trust is also consistent with the reciprocity mechanism predicted by social exchange theory. Employees perceive the organization's supportive and protective attitudes towards them as an indicator of psychological safety, and this perception results in a stronger emotional attachment to the organization and the adoption of organizational identity. Indeed, Elamin [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e] showed that perceived organizational support significantly increases organizational trust and that organizational trust plays a strong mediating role on emotional commitment The findings of the present study contribute to the literature by revealing that this relationship is not limited to commitment alone, but also encompasses deeper and longer-term attitudes such as organizational identification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnother important finding of the study is that organizational trust has a direct and significant effect on both organizational identification and organizational commitment. As employees' trust in their organizations increases, their perception of themselves as part of the organization strengthens, and they embrace organizational goals more readily. This demonstrates that trust is not only an individual attitude but also a fundamental psychosocial mechanism that enables employees to integrate with the corporate identity and develop long-term loyalty to the organization. Especially in fields requiring high responsibility, ethical sensitivity, and team-based work, such as healthcare, this direct effect of organizational trust plays a critical role in employee well-being and organizational continuity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings are consistent with current literature that reveals the decisive influence of organizational trust on organizational identification and commitment. Indeed, Li et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e] showed that organizational trust is strongly related to organizational identification and organizational commitment, and that these structures, when considered together, offer a central explanatory framework for understanding employees' attitudes and behaviors. The results of the present study reveal that these relationships are also valid in the context of the health sector, emphasizing that trust-based organizational structures have strategic importance in strengthening employee commitment and corporate belonging from a public health perspective.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings from the structural equation model (SEM) show that organizational support strengthens commitment and identification through trust. This finding suggests that trust is not only a \u0026ldquo;positive perception\u0026rdquo; but also a fundamental psychosocial resource that accelerates employees\u0026rsquo; psychological connection with the organization and their adoption of organizational goals. As the feeling of trust strengthens, employees\u0026rsquo; tendencies to define themselves as part of the organization (identification) and their orientation to remain in the organization/strive for the organization (commitment) increase; this points to a mechanism that can indirectly contribute to organizational resilience and service quality in areas where high responsibility and team-based functioning are key, such as healthcare. This assessment is consistent with recent findings showing that organizational trust is significantly related to organizational identity and organizational commitment, and that these constructs, when considered together, offer a powerful framework for explaining employee attitudes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe four-dimensional structure of the research sheds light on the development of inclusive management policies in healthcare institutions. The healthcare sector, with its high-stress and constantly interactive nature, is particularly sensitive to employees' perceptions of organizational support. In this context, in institutions where disabled healthcare workers are supported physically and psychologically, feelings of trust and commitment are strengthened; this directly and positively impacts patient safety, team cohesion, and service quality. This result demonstrates that organizational support is closely related not only to individual well-being but also to institutional performance and sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the scope of the research is not only behavioral but also includes ethical and social dimensions. The invisible barriers that disabled individuals face in working life are not only physical but also psychological and cultural. In this context, developing a supportive and inclusive organizational culture means internalizing social justice at the institutional level.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eLimitations and Future Research\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere are some limitations to consider when evaluating the findings of this research. First, the study was conducted using a cross-sectional research design. This limits the capacity to make inferences about the direction and causality of the relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment. Future longitudinal studies are needed to reveal the evolution of relationships between variables over time and possible cause-and-effect dynamics.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondly, the study sample is limited to disabled healthcare workers employed in public hospitals in Ankara province. The organizational structure, operation, and human resources practices of public hospitals may differ from those in other regions of Turkey or from private healthcare institutions. Therefore, the generalizability of the findings to different regions or private healthcare institutions may be limited.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThirdly, since participants' responses to the scales reflect their perceptions, future studies could strengthen the evidence by considering objective data from managers, colleagues, or organizational records.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, the exclusion of variables such as organizational climate, leadership style, relationships with colleagues, workload, and physical working conditions from the study's structural equation model may have significantly limited the explanation of organizational support, trust, identification, and commitment among disabled healthcare workers. Furthermore, disabled employees feeling valued in the workplace can improve their performance and job satisfaction, while perceptions of discrimination, injustice, and insufficient support can trigger organizational alienation and burnout. Therefore, supportive leadership, fair reward systems, a feedback culture, and trust-based communication strategies are essential for the sustainability of organizational health. Including these variables in future research can lead to a better understanding of the factors affecting organizational support, trust, identification, and commitment among disabled healthcare professionals.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study fills a significant gap in the literature by revealing the structural relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment among disabled healthcare professionals working in public hospitals in Turkey. The findings show that organizational support strengthens organizational trust through direct and indirect means; and that trust plays a decisive role in organizational identification and commitment. In particular, the strong influence of organizational trust on both identification and commitment reveals that a trust-based mechanism is central to the psychological bond that disabled healthcare professionals establish with their organizations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a public health perspective, these results suggest that inclusive and supportive organizational climates indirectly affect not only employee well-being but also the continuity of healthcare services, team cohesion, and service quality. In this context, strengthening organizational support mechanisms for disabled healthcare workers in public hospitals, adopting trust-based management approaches, and widespread implementation of inclusive human resources policies should be among the strategic priorities for a sustainable and equitable healthcare system.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEthical approval\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and received ethical approval form the Lokman Hekim University Scientific Research Ethics Committee (Approval No: 2023/9; 20 September 2023).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eConsent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003e All participants provided informed consent prior to participation in the research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eConsent to publication\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eClinical trial number\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo funds were received for this study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors actively contributed to all stages of the research process.UT contributed to the development of the research idea, literature review, data collection process, data analysis, interpretation of the results, and drafting of the initial manuscript.MK contributed to the conceptualization of the study, research design, statistical analyses, execution of the structural equation modeling, interpretation of the findings, and preparation of the final version of the manuscript.IS contributed to the development of the research methodology, evaluation of the measurement instruments, interpretation of analytical results, and provided critical academic input to the manuscript.BS contributed to the critical review of the scientific content, evaluation from a public health and health management perspective, strengthening of the discussion section, and substantial intellectual revision of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study is derived from a master's thesis completed in the Department of Health Management at Lokman Hekim University Institute of Health Sciences. The author confirms that all data generated or analyzed in that thesis are included in this published article. Furthermore, primary and secondary sources and data supporting the findings of this study were publicly available at the time the article was submitted.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZappella E. (2017). Workplace inclusion of employees with disabilities. Special Educational needs and Inclusive Practices. An ınternational Perspective. Fabio Dovigo, editor Sense Publishers. 217\u0026ndash;239.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeborg S, H\u0026uuml;nefeld L, Gerdes TS. Exploring the working conditions of disabled employees: a scoping review. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2024;19:2. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-023-00397-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12995-023-00397-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUnited Nations. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A/RES/61/106. United Nations; 2006.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLindsay S, Cagliostro E, Albarico M, Mortaji N, Karon L. (2018). A systematic review of the benefits of hiring people with disabilities. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 28\u003c/em\u003e(4), 634\u0026ndash;655. **doi:**10.1007/s10926-018-9756-z.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eT.C. Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı, Engelli ve Yaşlı Hizmetleri Genel M\u0026uuml;d\u0026uuml;rl\u0026uuml;ğ\u0026uuml;. (2015). Kamuda engelli istihdamının analizi.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAslan H, Karaalp-Orhan HS. T\u0026uuml;rkiye işg\u0026uuml;c\u0026uuml; piyasasında engelli istihdamına y\u0026ouml;nelik ayrımcılık: Talep y\u0026ouml;nl\u0026uuml; bir analiz. \u0026Ccedil;alışma İlişkileri Dergisi. 2021;12(1):24\u0026ndash;54. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cider/issue/60414/776888\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cider/issue/60414/776888\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKahraman S, Bulut C, Aydin E. Disability-accessibility at workplace: A research from Turkey. Bus Econ Res J. 2019;10(4):1005\u0026ndash;13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2019.216\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.20409/berj.2019.216\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEisenberger R, Huntington R, Hutchison S, Sowa D. Perceived organizational support. J Appl Psychol. 1986;71(3):500\u0026ndash;7. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeyer JP, Allen NJ. A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Hum Resource Manage Rev. 1991;1(1):61\u0026ndash;89. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBitew TA. Working conditions, perceived organizational support and organizational commitment of employees with disabilities in Gondar city public sectors. Eur Online J Nat Social Sci. 2023;12(1):53\u0026ndash;68. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://european-science.com/eojnss/article/download/6548/3078\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://european-science.com/eojnss/article/download/6548/3078\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eColl C, Mignonac K. Perceived organizational support and task performance of employees with disabilities: A need satisfaction and social identity perspectives. Int J Hum Resource Manage. 2023;34(10):2039\u0026ndash;73. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2022.2054284\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09585192.2022.2054284\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMarique G, Stinglhamber F, Desmette D, Caesens G, De Zanet F. The relationship between perceived organizational support and affective commitment: A social identity perspective. Group Organ Manage. 2013;38(1):68\u0026ndash;100. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1059601112457200\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1059601112457200\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRiketta M. Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. J Vocat Behav. 2005;66(2):358\u0026ndash;84. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2004.05.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jvb.2004.05.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShen Y, Jackson T, Ding C, Yuan D, Zhao L, Dou Y, Zhang Q. Linking perceived organizational support with employee work outcomes in a Chinese context: Organizational identification as a mediator. Eur Manag J. 2014;32(3):406\u0026ndash;12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.08.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.emj.2013.08.004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J Organizational Behav. 2004;25:293\u0026ndash;315. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/job.248\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/job.248\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDirks KT, Ferrin DL. Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. J Appl Psychol. 2002;87(4):611\u0026ndash;28. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD. An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manage Rev. 1995;20(3):709\u0026ndash;34. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/258792\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/258792\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTanğ Y, \u0026Ccedil;akır \u0026Ouml;. \u0026Ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tsel g\u0026uuml;venin, \u0026ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tsel bağlılık ve işten ayrılma niyeti ile ilişkisinin meta analiz y\u0026ouml;ntemiyle incelenmesi. 19 Mayıs Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2023;4(4):209\u0026ndash;29. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.52835/19maysbd.1351409\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.52835/19maysbd.1351409\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAl-Shalabi FS. The relationship between organisational trust and organisational identification and its effect on organisational loyalty. Int J Econ Bus Res. 2019;18(1):1\u0026ndash;30. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1504/IJEBR.2019.100646\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1504/IJEBR.2019.100646\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAshforth BE, Mael F. Social identity theory and the organization. Acad Manage Rev. 1989;14(1):20\u0026ndash;39. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4278999\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5465/amr.1989.4278999\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMathieu JE, Zajac DM. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychol Bull. 1990;108(2):171\u0026ndash;94. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.171\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.171\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeyer JP, Stanley DJ, Herscovitch L, Topolnytsky L. Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. J Vocat Behav. 2002;61(1):20\u0026ndash;52. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRiketta M. Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. J Organizational Behav. 2002;23:257\u0026ndash;66. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/job.141\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/job.141\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShantz A, Wang J, Malik AR. Disability status, individual variable pay, and pay satisfaction: Does relational and institutional trust make a difference? Hum Resour Manag. 2018;57(1):365\u0026ndash;80. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21845\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/hrm.21845\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eErkal P. Inclusive manager behaviors in organizations: A qualitative research on disabled public employees. Dokuz Eyl\u0026uuml;l \u0026Uuml;niversitesi İşletme Fak\u0026uuml;ltesi Dergisi. 2024;25(2):153\u0026ndash;71. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.24889/ifede.1538213\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.24889/ifede.1538213\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWong J, Shaw L, Chan F, Iwanaga K, Strauser DR, McMahon BT. Job accommodations, return to work and job retention of people with physical disabilities: A systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2021;31(3):474\u0026ndash;90. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10926-020-09954-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10926-020-09954-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKahraman S, Bulut C, Aydın E. Disability-accessibility at workplace: A research from Turkey. Bus Econ Res J. 2019;10(4):1005\u0026ndash;13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.20409/berj.2019.216\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.20409/berj.2019.216\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim EJ, Kim I, Kim MJ. The impact of workplace disability facilities on job retention wishes among people with physical disabilities in South Korea. Sustainability. 2020;12(18):7489. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/su12187489\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su12187489\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTilki \u0026Ouml;zcan ZT, G\u0026uuml;ney S, Metin Camg\u0026ouml;z S. Yıldırma, \u0026ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tsel sinizm, iş doyumu ve işten ayrılma niyeti ilişkilerinde seri aracılık etkileri: \u0026Ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tlerde engelli \u0026ccedil;alışanlar \u0026uuml;zerine bir araştırma. Psikoloji \u0026Ccedil;alışmaları. 2021;41(1):199\u0026ndash;229. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.26650/SP2020-0008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.26650/SP2020-0008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003evan der Rodgers M, Schur Y, Hammond L, Edwards FM, Cohen R, J., Kruse D. Disability, job satisfaction, and workplace accommodations: Evidence from the healthcare industry. J Occup Rehabilitation Adv online publication. 2025. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10926-025-10316-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10926-025-10316-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCameron VK, Jones M, Lee S, McNelis AM. Barriers to retention of nurses with acquired disability: A scoping review. Nurs Manag. 2024;55(3):8\u0026ndash;16. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1097/NMG.0000000000000101\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/NMG.0000000000000101\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoscelli G, Mello MM, Sayli M, Boyle A. Nurse and doctor turnover and patient outcomes in NHS acute trusts in England: Retrospective longitudinal study. BMJ. 2024;387:e079987. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1136/bmj-2024-079987\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1136/bmj-2024-079987\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShanock LR, Eisenberger R. When supervisors feel supported: Relationships with subordinates' perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and performance. J Appl Psychol. 2006;91(3):689\u0026ndash;95. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.689\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.689\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNyhan RC, Marlowe HA. Development and Psychometric Properties of the Organizational Trust Inventory. Eval Rev. 1997;21(5):614\u0026ndash;35. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9702100505\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0193841X9702100505\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMael F, Ashforth BE. Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. J Organizational Behav. 1992;13(2):103\u0026ndash;23. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/job.4030130202\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBabin BJ, Boles JS. Employee behavior in a service environment: A model and test of potential differences between men and women. J Mark. 1998;62(2):77\u0026ndash;91. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/1252162\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/1252162\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNetemeyer RG, Boles JS, McKee DO, McMurrian R. An Investigation into the Antecedents of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in a Personal Selling Context. J Mark. 1997;61(3):85\u0026ndash;98. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/1251791\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/1251791\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHartline MD, Ferrell OC. The Management of Customer-Contact Service Employees: An Empirical Investigation. J Mark. 1996;60:52\u0026ndash;70. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/1251901\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/1251901\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAltaş SS. Sağlık \u0026ccedil;alışanlarının \u0026ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tsel \u0026ouml;zdeşleşme, \u0026ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tsel bağlılık, \u0026ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tsel g\u0026uuml;ven ve \u0026ouml;rg\u0026uuml;tsel destek algıları arasındaki ilişkiler. İşletme araştırmaları dergisi. 2021;13(1):875\u0026ndash;91. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2021.1171\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.20491/isarder.2021.1171\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Modeling: Multidisciplinary J. 1999;6(1):1\u0026ndash;55. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10705519909540118\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 4th ed. The Guilford Press; 2015.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 8th ed. Cengage Learning; 2019.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchur L, Nishii L, Adya M, Kruse D, Bruyere SM, Blanck P. Accommodating employees with and without disabilities. Hum Resour Manag. 2014;53(4):593\u0026ndash;621. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21607\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/hrm.21607\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMowday RT, Porter LW, Steers RM. Employee\u0026ndash;organization linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic; 1982.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eElamin AM. Exploring the relationship between perceived organizational support and affective commitment among Saudi employees: The mediating effect of organizational trust. Business: Theory Pract. 2024;25(2):434\u0026ndash;46. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2024.16845\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3846/btp.2024.16845\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi Y, Liu Z, Qin K, Cui J, Zeng X, Ji M, Lan J, You X, Li Y. Organizational trust and safety operation behavior in airline pilots: The mediating effects of organizational identification and organizational commitment. J Air Transp Manage. 2021;92:102018. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102018\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102018\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShie E-H, Chang S-H. Perceived principal\u0026rsquo;s authentic leadership impact on the organizational citizenship behavior and well-being of teachers. SAGE Open. 2022;12(2). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221095003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/21582440221095003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-public-health","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Public Health](https://link.springer.com/journal/12982)","snPcode":"12982","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/12982/3","title":"Discover Public Health","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Disabled healthcare professionals, organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, organizational commitment, Turkey","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8412751/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8412751/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eObjective\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite being a critical but underrepresented workforce component of the healthcare system, disabled healthcare professionals working in the health sector may experience different organizational experiences than other employees due to the structural and psychosocial barriers they face in the work environment. In this context, this study aims to examine the structural relationships between perceived organizational support, organizational trust, organizational identification, and organizational commitment among disabled healthcare professionals working in public hospitals in Turkey.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA cross-sectional study was conducted on 316 disabled healthcare professionals working in 15 public hospitals in Ankara between November 2023 and February 2024. Data were collected using a survey method. The structural validity of the scales used in the research was examined with confirmatory factor analysis, their reliability with the internal consistency coefficient, and the relationships between variables with structural equation modeling.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt was found that perceived organizational support positively and significantly affected both organizational trust (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001; β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.808) and organizational commitment (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.012; β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.258); while organizational trust positively and significantly affected both organizational identity (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001; β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.774) and organizational commitment (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.016; β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.322).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusion\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrengthening organizational support mechanisms is critical for enabling disabled healthcare professionals to develop positive attitudes towards their organizations. The findings are expected to contribute to the development of inclusive human resources policies in public hospitals and the planning of interventions aimed at improving the organizational well-being of disabled healthcare professionals.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"An Examination of the Relationships Between Organizational Support, Trust, Identification, and Commitment Among Disabled Healthcare Workers Employed in Public Hospitals in Turkey","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-01-14 05:19:58","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8412751/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-02-04T07:38:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-01-26T14:00:46+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-01-23T14:32:59+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"193414735943630300025632687987356607709","date":"2026-01-20T16:43:54+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"307993670179658706368443360657871776334","date":"2026-01-17T17:50:49+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-01-12T11:45:01+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-12-24T04:21:31+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-12-22T11:05:13+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-12-22T11:01:37+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Public Health","date":"2025-12-20T14:13:39+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-public-health","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Public Health](https://link.springer.com/journal/12982)","snPcode":"12982","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/12982/3","title":"Discover Public Health","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"ddc77331-54e8-46c5-86b3-09419335caa1","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 14th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-08T03:09:21+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-01-14 05:19:58","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8412751","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8412751","identity":"rs-8412751","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}