Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Correction to: Asian J Bus Ethics
10.1007/s13520-020-00109-4
In the published article, there was a mistake in Table 4.
Table 4 Discriminant validity
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Psy. Contract (fulfillment) | 0.75 | |||||
VB (positive) | 0.134 | 0.715 | ||||
Psy contract (violations) | 0.27 | 0.016 | 0.715 | |||
VB (Prohibitive) | 0.253 | 0.075 | 0.582 | 0.741 | ||
Job satisfaction | 0.422 | 0.177 | 0.525 | 0.502 | 0.748 | |
Job dissatisfaction | 0.463 | 0.083 | 0.624 | 0.424 | 0.426 | 0.756 |
The negative sign in some of the values were not noted when the variables had negative correlations. Although, discussed in the article, the table should be noted correctly. The correct table should be read as follows:
Table 4 Discriminant validity
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Psy. contract (fulfillment) | 0.75 | |||||
VB (positive) | 0.134 | 0.715 | ||||
Psy contract (violations) | −0.27 | −0.016 | 0.715 | |||
VB (prohibitive) | −0.253 | −0.075 | 0.582 | 0.741 | ||
Job satisfaction | 0.422 | 0.177 | −0.525 | −0.502 | 0.748 | |
Job dissatisfaction | −0.463 | −0.083 | 0.624 | 0.424 | −0.426 | 0.756 |
In the article, there was also a typographical error in Table 5 with regards to the minus sign.
Table 5 PLS Structural Model Results
Model 1 | Coefficients | Standard Deviation (STDEV) | T Statistics | P Values | 2.50% | 97.50% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Psy.contract fulfill -> Job satisfaction | 0.240 | 0.044 | 6.086 | 0.00 | 0.188 | 0.328 |
Job satisfaction-> positive voice behavior | 0.239 | 0.072 | 5.306 | 0.03 | 0.321 | 0.246 |
Psy.contract->job satisfaction -> positive voice behavior | -0.278 | 0.054 | 4.418 | 0.00 | -0.317 | -0.129 |
Model 2 | Coefficients | Standard Deviation (STDEV) | T Statistics | P Values | 2.50% | 97.50% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Psy.contract violate -> Job dissatisfaction | 0.219 | 0.079 | 3.46 | 0.01 | 0.246 | 0.202 |
Job dissatisfaction->negative voice behavior | 0.220 | 0.049 | 4.329 | 0.02 | 0.031 | 0.216 |
Psy.contract violate->job dissatisfaction ->negative voice behavior | -0.272 | 0.049 | 4.328 | 0.00 | -0.207 | -0.129 |
There is no minus sign in table five. This is mentioned in the text as well, that all the relationships are positive. Therefore, all negative signs should be ignored / removed. Accordingly, table 5 should be read as following:
Table 5 PLS structural model results
Coefficients | Standard deviation (STDEV) | T statistics | P values | 2.50% | 97.50% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1 | ||||||
Psy. contract fulfill -> job satisfaction | 0.240 | 0.044 | 6.086 | 0.00 | 0.188 | 0.328 |
Job satisfaction-> positive voice behavior | 0.239 | 0.072 | 5.306 | 0.03 | 0.321 | 0.246 |
Psy. contract->job satisfaction -> positive voice behavior | 0.278 | 0.054 | 4.418 | 0.00 | 0.317 | 0.129 |
Model 2 | ||||||
Psy. contract violate -> job dissatisfaction | 0.219 | 0.079 | 3.46 | 0.01 | 0.246 | 0.202 |
Job dissatisfaction -> negative voice behavior | 0.220 | 0.049 | 4.329 | 0.02 | 0.031 | 0.216 |
Psy. contract violate -> job dissatisfaction -> negative voice behavior | 0.272 | 0.049 | 4.328 | 0.00 | 0.207 | 0.129 |
The authors apologize for these errors and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in anyway. We are again extremely sorry for this inconvenience.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The online version of the original article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-020-00109-4
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Memon, K.R., Ghani, B. Correction to: The relationship between psychological contract and voice behavior—a social exchange perspective. Asian J Bus Ethics 13, 399–401 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-023-00187-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-023-00187-0