Introduction
In contexts of resource scarcity, organizations often face difficulties in fulfilling the commitments made to their employees, which can lead to perceptions of injustice and a breakdown in trust (Aplin-Houtz, Sanders & Lane, Reference Aplin-Houtz, Sanders and Lane2023; March, Aplin-Houtz, Lawrence, Lane & Meriac, Reference March, Aplin-Houtz, Lawrence, Lane and Meriac2023). Such breaches in perceived justice and unmet expectations have been directly linked to declines in affective organizational commitment (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Anvari, Kumpikaitė-Valiūnienė, Mobarhan, Janjaria & Hosseinpour Chermahini, Reference Anvari, Kumpikaitė-Valiūnienė, Mobarhan, Janjaria and Hosseinpour Chermahini2023; Yu, Reference Yu2024). Affective commitment remains a key construct, as it has been consistently associated with improved productivity, job performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors (Agustina & Satrya, Reference Agustina and Satrya2025; Ng, Reference Ng2023; Lee & Kim, Reference Lee and Kim2023; Shemeis, Reference Shemeis2023; Swalhi, Zgoulli & Hofaidhllaoui, Reference Swalhi, Zgoulli and Hofaidhllaoui2017). Highly committed employees tend to demonstrate greater consistency in their work and alignment with organizational goals (Lee & Kim, Reference Lee and Kim2023; Sheikh, Reference Sheikh2017). They are also more likely to adopt institutional values and assume personal responsibility for organizational success (Alqudah, Carballo-Penela & Ruzo-Sanmartín, Reference Alqudah, Carballo-Penela and Ruzo-Sanmartín2022; Ng, Reference Ng2023).
Within the university context, academics’ affective commitment is especially critical, as it directly impacts the core mission of higher education institutions – namely, the creation and dissemination of knowledge through teaching, research, and learning activities (Iqbal, Reference Iqbal2021; Karim, Reference Karim2023; Ng, Reference Ng2023). Therefore, strong affective commitment among academics contributes not only to institutional development but also to student success and educational quality.
Three relational constructs have emerged as central to understanding workplace dynamics: psychological contracts, perceptions of distributive justice, and LMX relationships (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Agustina & Satrya, Reference Agustina and Satrya2025; Farid, Xiongying, Raza, Gul & Hanif, Reference Farid, Xiongying, Raza, Gul and Hanif2023; Jia et al., Reference Jia, Wu, Liu, Tang, Cai and Jia2023; Griep, Kraak & Herrbach, Reference Griep, Kraak and Herrbach2025). While prior studies have examined the individual influence of these variables on affective commitment (Agustina & Satrya, Reference Agustina and Satrya2025; Nazir, Shafi, Atif, Qun & Abdullah, Reference Nazir, Shafi, Atif, Qun and Abdullah2019; Rashid, Dastgeer & Kayani, Reference Rashid, Dastgeer and Kayani2018; Swalhi et al., Reference Swalhi, Zgoulli and Hofaidhllaoui2017; Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski & Bravo, Reference Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski and Bravo2007), no research has explored how they operate collectively within the academic context. In this regard, social exchange theory (SET) offers a valuable lens for understanding the reciprocity and relational dynamics that underpin these constructs.
Following the 2008–2014 economic and financial crisis, Spanish universities experienced significant budget cuts, many of which persist more than a decade later. According to a recent report by the trade union organization Comisiones Obreras (CCOO, 2025), public universities in Spain continue to face critical underfunding. Moreover, some authors have highlighted that public universities in Spain have experienced strong pressure related to performance evaluation, funding restrictions, and employment expectations (De La Torre, Perez-Esparrells & Romero-Madrid, Reference De La Torre, Perez-Esparrells and Romero-Madrid2021). This situation may intensify academics’ sensitivity to the fulfillment of psychological contracts and perceptions of justice, making it especially relevant to examine these dynamics in the current context.
Understanding how psychological contract fulfillment, distributive justice, and LMX relationships influence affective commitment is vital – particularly because committed academics are more likely to remain in their institutions and exert discretionary efforts to support both institutional goals and student outcomes (Sheikh, Reference Sheikh2017).
Although several studies have examined relationships between some of these variables – for example, Estreder, Tomás, Chambel and Ramos (Reference Estreder, Tomás, Chambel and Ramos2019) explored links between psychological contract violation, organizational commitment, and organizational justice, while Clinton and Guest (Reference Clinton and Guest2014) found that exchange justice mediated the link between contract violation and voluntary turnover – no prior research has integrated psychological contracts, distributive justice, LMX, and affective commitment into a single explanatory model, particularly in academic settings affected by prolonged budget constraints.
This reveals a gap in the literature, particularly regarding questions such as: Does the psychological contract serve as a precursor to distributive justice? Is its fulfillment sufficient to foster affective commitment? Is distributive justice a necessary intermediary? Can LMX relationships enhance or buffer these effects?
To address this gap, the present study proposes an integrative model examining the interplay between psychological contract fulfillment, distributive justice, and LMX in shaping affective organizational commitment among academics. The main objective is to understand the direct and indirect effects of these variables, focusing particularly on the moderating role of LMX in times of financial uncertainty.
This research contributes to the literature in several ways. First, it responds to calls for more nuanced analyses of how psychological contracts influence perceived justice and employee attitudes (Lambert, Bingham & Zabinski, Reference Lambert, Bingham and Zabinski2020; Tziner, Felea & Vasiliu, Reference Tziner, Felea and Vasiliu2017). Second, it extends understanding of the role of LMX relationships in the mediation of distributive justice. Third, it integrates three key constructs – psychological contracts, distributive justice, and LMX – into a single model, offering a more holistic view of the relational mechanisms behind affective commitment. Lastly, it addresses a gap in university-based research, providing insights into how to foster commitment in environments marked by resource constraints and institutional instability.
The paper is structured as follows. First, the theoretical background that is the basis for the hypotheses is outlined. After the description of the methodology, the results are presented. Finally, the discussion, implications, limitations of the study, and proposals for future research and conclusions are presented.
Literature review
SET explains how two or more parties exchange resources, how these exchanges develop, and how they influence the relationships between the parties involved (Cropanzano, Anthony, Daniels & Hall, Reference Cropanzano, Anthony, Daniels and Hall2017). This framework has been widely applied to understand employment relationships, particularly in studies involving psychological contracts (Agarwal & Gupta, Reference Agarwal and Gupta2018; Bahadır, Yeşiltaş, Sesen & Olaleye, Reference Bahadır, Yeşiltaş, Sesen and Olaleye2024; Gulzar, Hussain, Akhlaq, Abbas & Ghauri, Reference Gulzar, Hussain, Akhlaq, Abbas and Ghauri2024; Maqbool et al., Reference Maqbool, Lyu, Ullah, Khan, Abeden and Kukreti2024; Sandeepanie, Gamage, Perera & Sajeewani, Reference Sandeepanie, Gamage, Perera and Sajeewani2023), distributive justice (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Farid et al., Reference Farid, Xiongying, Raza, Gul and Hanif2023), and LMX (Jia et al., Reference Jia, Wu, Liu, Tang, Cai and Jia2023; March et al., Reference March, Aplin-Houtz, Lawrence, Lane and Meriac2023). SET helps to interpret the outcomes of such exchanges (March et al., Reference March, Aplin-Houtz, Lawrence, Lane and Meriac2023; Wayne et al., Reference Wayne, Shore and Liden1997; Whitener et al., Reference Whitener, Brodt, Korsgaard and Werner1998).
Originally proposed by Blau (Reference Blau1964), SET posits that employees are more likely to exhibit positive attitudes and behaviors when they believe their expectations from the social exchange relationship with the organization have been met. Such positive exchanges can enhance performance, foster organizational citizenship behavior, and increase job satisfaction (Chernyak-Hai & Tziner, Reference Chernyak-Hai and Tziner2014; Cole, Schaninger & Harris, Reference Cole, Schaninger and Harris2002). Conversely, unmet expectations can result in lower job satisfaction, increased turnover intentions (Jung & Takeuchi, Reference Jung and Takeuchi2019), and counterproductive work behaviors (Chernyak-Hai & Tziner, Reference Chernyak-Hai and Tziner2014). At the core of these outcomes lies the principle of reciprocity, a foundational mechanism of social exchange. Resources are shared as a gesture of goodwill to strengthen mutual relationships (Gouldner, Reference Gouldner1960), and the strength of these exchanges depends on the quality of the relationship (Blau, Reference Blau2017). Reciprocity is central to SET, whereby the expectation of mutual benefit fosters trust and obligation (Gouldner, Reference Gouldner1960; Molm, Reference Molm2010).
Within this framework, the three key variables of this study – psychological contract, distributive justice, and leader–member exchange (LMX) – are analyzed to explore their role in shaping affective organizational commitment.
Psychological contract
The psychological contract has been widely examined to understand the implicit relationship between employees and employers (Ali, Reference Ali2021; Azeem, Bajwa, Shahzad & Aslam, Reference Azeem, Bajwa, Shahzad and Aslam2020; Bahadır et al., Reference Bahadır, Yeşiltaş, Sesen and Olaleye2024; Cohen, Reference Cohen2011; Maqbool et al., Reference Maqbool, Lyu, Ullah, Khan, Abeden and Kukreti2024; Rai & Agarwal, Reference Rai and Agarwal2021; Sandeepanie et al., Reference Sandeepanie, Gamage, Perera and Sajeewani2023; Tziner et al., Reference Tziner, Felea and Vasiliu2017). It refers to individuals’ beliefs regarding mutual obligations between themselves and their employer (Rousseau, Reference Rousseau1989, Reference Rousseau1995). These obligations may arise from both explicit and implicit promises (Van Gilst et al., Reference van Gilst, Schalk, Kluijtmans and Poell2020).
The psychological contract framework is recognized as a critical indicator of the quality of the employment relationship (Topa, Aranda-Carmena & De-Maria, Reference Topa, Aranda-Carmena and De-Maria2022; van der Smissen, Schalk & Freese, Reference van der Smissen, Schalk and Freese2013), in which employees tend to reciprocate the benefits they receive. For instance, they may demonstrate loyalty and extra effort in exchange for tangible or intangible rewards (Gulzar et al., Reference Gulzar, Hussain, Akhlaq, Abbas and Ghauri2024; Rhoades & Eisenberger, Reference Rhoades and Eisenberger2002). Blau (Reference Blau2017) emphasized the human tendency to seek balance in social interactions, suggesting that perceived imbalances may lead to negative outcomes.
Distributive justice
The literature on distributive justice, based on Adams’ (Reference Adams1963, Reference Adams1965) Equity Theory, centers on employees’ perceptions regarding the fairness of organizational outcomes. Specifically, this perspective evaluates how employees relate their individual contributions to the benefits they receive from the organization, under the expectation of a balanced and equitable exchange between both parties (Cropanzano & Greenberg, Reference Cropanzano and Greenberg1997; Lee, Murrmann, Murrmann & Kim, Reference Lee, Murrmann, Murrmann and Kim2010; Lee & Rhee, Reference Lee and Rhee2023; Mensah, Asiamah & Mireku, Reference Mensah, Asiamah and Mireku2016). When employees perceive that their input outweighs the rewards they obtain, a sense of injustice emerges (Lee & Rhee, Reference Lee and Rhee2023). This perceived imbalance generates a state of psychological tension or dissonance that can motivate behavioral changes aimed at restoring equilibrium within the workplace (Cropanzano, Bowen & Gilliland, Reference Cropanzano, Bowen and Gilliland2007; De Boer, Bakker, Syroit & Schaufeli, Reference De Boer, Bakker, Syroit and Schaufeli2002; Villanueva-Flores & Cabrera, Reference Villanueva-Flores and Cabrera2011; Villanueva-Flores, Valle & Bornay-Barrachina, Reference Villanueva-Flores, Valle and Bornay-Barrachina2017; Villanueva-Flores, Valle-Cabrera & Ramón-Jerónimo, Reference Villanueva-Flores, Valle-Cabrera and Ramón-Jerónimo2015). Moreover, such perceptions of justice or injustice may be amplified through the use of comparative referents – whether colleagues, one’s own past experiences within the organization, or experiences in other organizations (Goodman, Reference Goodman1974; Villanueva-Flores et al., Reference Villanueva-Flores, Valle and Bornay-Barrachina2017). Therefore, distributive justice can be understood as employees’ subjective evaluations of the fairness of received outcomes in proportion to their contributions, regardless of whether such evaluations involve direct comparisons with others (Mensah et al., Reference Mensah, Asiamah and Mireku2016).
Leader–member exchange
LMX theory refers to the quality of the relationship between an employee and their immediate supervisor (Graen, Reference Graen2003; Graen & Uhl-Bien, Reference Graen and Uhl-Bien1995; Terpstra-Tong et al., Reference Terpstra-Tong, Ralston, Treviño, Naoumova, de la Garza Carranza, Furrer and Darder2020). It is grounded in concepts of exchange and reciprocity (Adams, Reference Adams1965), and closely linked to SET. According to the norm of reciprocity, individuals tend to help those who have previously helped or treated them favorably (Gouldner, Reference Gouldner1960). Thus, when a person provides benefits to another, they expect to receive benefits in return (Gouldner, Reference Gouldner1960; Lapointe et al., Reference Lapointe, Vandenberghe, Ben Ayed, Schwarz, Tremblay and Chenevert2020).
In organizational settings, the exchange relationship between leader and follower is developed and maintained through daily interactions as they carry out their respective roles (Fairhurst, Reference Fairhurst1993). Through these relationships, employees describe their interactions as friendly, open, trusting, respectful, and mutually supportive – characteristics of high-quality LMX relationships. In contrast, others experience relationships marked by low trust, strictly work-related interactions, and even hostile, distant, confrontational, or aggressive behaviors, which define low-quality LMX relationships (Graen & Uhl-Bien, Reference Graen and Uhl-Bien1995).
High-quality relationships are characterized by closeness and warmth and are associated with higher performance evaluations, as employees tend to go beyond their formal job duties. On the other hand, in low-quality LMX relationships, subordinates often adopt more passive roles, performing only the tasks outlined in their job descriptions (Liden & Graen, Reference Liden and Graen1980). These differences in LMX significantly impact work satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job performance (Ariani & Feriyanto, Reference Ariani and Feriyanto2024; Bennouna, Boughaba, Mouda & Djabou, Reference Bennouna, Boughaba, Mouda and Djabou2024; Dulebohn, Wu & Liao, Reference Dulebohn, Wu and Liao2017).
Linking psychological contract and distributive justice
Some authors have examined the relationship between psychological contracts and perceptions of distributive justice. Byrne and Cropanzano (Reference Byrne and Cropanzano2001) proposed that a reciprocal relationship exists between the two variables. Tziner et al. (Reference Tziner, Felea and Vasiliu2017) investigated the link between psychological contract breach and justice perception, finding that breaches in the psychological contract negatively affect individuals’ perceptions of justice. Their findings indicate that while psychological contracts and perceived justice are closely related, they are not synonymous. Similarly, Kickul, Neuman, Parker and Finkl (Reference Kickul, Neuman, Parker and Finkl2001) suggested that a breach of the psychological contract can be interpreted as a form of distributive injustice, particularly when employees perceive that the organization has failed to deliver promised outcomes such as fair compensation, career opportunities, or recognition. Their research highlights that such breaches often lead employees to reevaluate the fairness of the employment relationship, especially in terms of how resources and rewards are allocated. Cohen (Reference Cohen2012) explored the influence of perceived justice on psychological contracts and demonstrated that employees who perceive higher levels of justice are more likely to feel that their psychological contracts are being upheld. Estreder, Rigotti, Tomás and Ramos (Reference Estreder, Rigotti, Tomás and Ramos2020) reported that when employees perceive violation of their psychological contract and attribute the responsibility to their organization, they tend to respond negatively, leading to a decline in their perceptions of justice within the employment relationship.
More recent studies have examined the influence of organizational justice on psychological contracts, finding a significant relationship between them. Specifically, Ebrahimzadeh, Zahednezhad, Atashzadeh-Shoorideh and Masjedi Arani (Reference Ebrahimzadeh, Zahednezhad, Atashzadeh-Shoorideh and Masjedi Arani2024) found that higher perceptions of organizational justice were associated with lower levels of psychological contract breach. They expressed that when employees perceive justice within the organization, they tend to believe that psychological contracts are being upheld, which fosters a positive sentiment toward the organization. Sharma and Singh (Reference Sharma and Singh2023) found that organizational justice was a more significant predictor of psychological contract fulfillment than organizational trust. Therefore, fostering organizational justice may serve as a key mechanism through which organizations can reinforce psychological contracts and promote more stable and positive employment relationships. Despite these contributions, the precise nature of the relationship between psychological contracts and distributive justice remains unclear.
From these perspectives, it can be inferred that the fulfillment – or lack thereof – of psychological contracts influences employees’ perceptions of distributive justice. When employees perceive that their psychological contracts have been kept, they are more likely to view their relationship with the organization as fair. Conversely, if they believe that the promises made to them have not been kept, they are likely to perceive the relationship as unjust. In this sense, psychological contract fulfillment acts as a signal that the organization values employee contributions, thereby strengthening perceptions of distributive justice. Furthermore, psychological contract unfulfillment can trigger perceptions of injustice, particularly when discrepancies become salient in comparisons with colleagues. In this respect, when academics perceive that their university has not fulfilled agreed-upon expectations – i.e., that psychological contracts have been breached – they may view the balance between what they contribute (e.g., publications and teaching) and what they receive (e.g., salary, teaching load, and research funding) as injustice.
In the context of Spanish universities, where resources are often limited, psychological contracts may be violated through the provision of fewer benefits or opportunities than initially promised, whether explicitly or implicitly. This may contribute to a perception of distributive injustice, particularly when academics compare themselves to their peers or to their own previous circumstances. Moreover, in academic settings where performance indicators and evaluation metrics are highly visible, unfulfillment of psychological contracts may exacerbate feelings of injustice, as outcomes become more directly comparable across individuals and departments. However, in times of budget constraints and resource scarcity, if the psychological contract is perceived to be maintained, academics are more likely to view their relationship with the university as fair. Therefore, it is proposed that psychological contracts precede perceptions of distributive justice, leading to the formulation of the first hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: Psychological contract fulfillment is positively related to the distributive justice.
Psychological contract, distributive justice, and affective commitment
Affective or attitudinal commitment refers to an emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization (Mensah et al., Reference Mensah, Asiamah and Mireku2016; Mowday, Porter & Steers, Reference Mowday, Porter and Steers2013; Sheikh, Reference Sheikh2017; Tan, Choong & Choe, Reference Tan, Choong and Choe2020). It represents a positive emotional bond that fosters a strong desire to contribute to the achievement of organizational goals. This type of commitment is typically reflected in employees’ willingness to work overtime, their sense of belonging within the organization, and a low intention to leave (Mensah et al., Reference Mensah, Asiamah and Mireku2016). As such, affective commitment is regarded as a key variable (Katou, Reference Katou2013; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch & Topolnytsky, Reference Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch and Topolnytsky2002; Ribeiro, Duarte, Filipe & David, Reference Ribeiro, Duarte, Filipe and David2022; Usman, Javed, Shoukat & Bashir, Reference Usman, Javed, Shoukat and Bashir2021), as it signals employee loyalty to the organization (Aflah, Suharnomo, Mas’ud & Mursid, Reference Aflah, Suharnomo, Mas’ud and Mursid2021; Cen et al., Reference Cen, Cahyadi, Cahyadi, Candrasa, Sinurat, Ilham and Saputra2021; Sheikh, Reference Sheikh2017). Numerous studies have found that employees with higher levels of affective commitment tend to exert greater effort in their work than those with lower levels of commitment (Bizri, Wahbi & Al Jardali, Reference Bizri, Wahbi and Al Jardali2021; Meyer & Allen, Reference Meyer and Allen1997). Consequently, affective commitment has been positively associated with job performance (Bizri et al., Reference Bizri, Wahbi and Al Jardali2021; Chang & Chen, Reference Chang and Chen2011; Riketta, Reference Riketta2002).
One of the key antecedents of affective commitment identified in the literature is the psychological contract. Psychological contract fulfillment has been linked to increased employee satisfaction (Rodwell, Ellershaw & Flower, Reference Rodwell, Ellershaw and Flower2015), enhanced job performance (Conway & Coyle‐Shapiro, Reference Conway and Coyle‐Shapiro2012; Hammouri, Altaher, Rabaa’i, Khataybeh & Al-Gasawneh, Reference Hammouri, Altaher, Rabaa’i, Khataybeh and Al-Gasawneh2022), and greater affective organizational commitment (Atrizka, Lubis, Simanjuntak & Pratama, Reference Atrizka, Lubis, Simanjuntak and Pratama2020; Griep et al., Reference Griep, Kraak and Herrbach2025; Kim, Laffranchini, Wagstaff & Jeung, Reference Kim, Laffranchini, Wagstaff and Jeung2017; Mazumdar, Warren, Dupré & Brown, Reference Mazumdar, Warren, Dupré and Brown2023; Yu, Reference Yu2024; Zhao et al., Reference Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski and Bravo2007). However, some scholars argue that psychological contract fulfillment does not always lead to improved employee performance or satisfaction (Beardwell & Claydon, Reference Beardwell and Claydon2007). On the contrary, the breach of psychological contracts often results in employee demotivation, decreased affective commitment, higher absenteeism, increased turnover, and diminished performance (Cohen, Reference Cohen2011; Griep et al., Reference Griep, Kraak and Herrbach2025; Wangithi & Muceke, Reference Wangithi and Muceke2012; Zhao et al., Reference Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski and Bravo2007).
In line with these findings and based on SET, it is proposed that the fulfillment of psychological contracts strengthens the relationship between employees and the organization, thereby enhancing affective commitment. In the context of universities, particularly during periods of limited resources, honoring psychological contracts may help maintain – or even increase – the affective commitment of academic staff, who may appreciate that the institution upholds its promises despite budget constraints. Based on this reasoning, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 2: Psychological contract fulfillment is positively related to affective organizational commitment.
Similarly, perceptions of distributive justice significantly influence various work-related attitudes and behaviors (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Cohen, Reference Cohen2011; Ling, Yao, Liu & Chen, Reference Ling, Yao, Liu and Chen2024; Moorman, Reference Moorman1991). Several studies have underscored the importance of distributive justice in predicting workplace outcomes, revealing a positive relationship between distributive justice and task performance (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Skarlicki & Folger, Reference Skarlicki and Folger1997). When employees perceive fair treatment in terms of rewards and outcomes, they are more likely to experience job satisfaction (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Ghaderi, Tabatabaei, Khoshkam & Shahabi Sorman Abadi, Reference Ghaderi, Tabatabaei, Khoshkam and Shahabi Sorman Abadi2023; Villanueva-Flores et al., Reference Villanueva-Flores, Valle and Bornay-Barrachina2017) and to develop positive attitudes toward their work, particularly regarding their involvement and engagement within the organization (Cohen-Charash & Spector, Reference Cohen-Charash and Spector2001; Ling et al., Reference Ling, Yao, Liu and Chen2024).
Moreover, several scholars have highlighted the link between distributive justice and affective organizational commitment. They suggest that fostering a workplace culture grounded in fairness and positive relationships can enhance employees’ emotional attachment to the organization (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Malla & Malla, Reference Malla and Malla2023; Nazir et al., Reference Nazir, Shafi, Atif, Qun and Abdullah2019). In this context, academic staff who perceive a fair balance between their contributions to the university (e.g., teaching and research) and the rewards they receive (e.g., compensation and research support) are likely to maintain or even increase their affective commitment. This sense of fairness becomes particularly salient in times of limited resources, where the perceived integrity of the exchange relationship may be valued even more highly.
Based on SET and this reasoning, the third hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 3: The distributive justice is positively related to affective organizational commitment.
The mediating role of distributive justice
As previously discussed, prior research has highlighted the relationship between psychological contracts and perceptions of distributive justice (Griep et al., Reference Griep, Kraak and Herrbach2025; Zhao et al., Reference Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski and Bravo2007), as well as between perceived justice and affective commitment (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Nazir et al., Reference Nazir, Shafi, Atif, Qun and Abdullah2019). Clinton and Guest (Reference Clinton and Guest2014) demonstrated that exchange fairness and trust mediate the relationship between psychological contract breach and voluntary turnover. Their findings showed that exchange fairness is a key explanatory mechanism linking contract breaches to negative outcomes, with the strongest mediating effect occurring through perceptions of fairness. Distributive justice – operationalized as perceptions of exchange fairness – therefore connects cognitive evaluations of broken promises to employees’ negative affective and behavioral responses, underscoring its role as a central mechanism in the deterioration of the employment relationship.
Similarly, Estreder et al. (Reference Estreder, Tomás, Chambel and Ramos2019) distinguished between psychological contract breach and violation. Their mediation analysis confirmed that organizational justice operates as a mechanism linking employer fulfillment of the psychological contract to employees’ organizational commitment. Specifically, employer fulfillment was negatively related to perceptions of psychological contract violation, which in turn was associated with higher perceptions of organizational justice. Organizational justice, in turn, exhibited a significant positive effect on organizational commitment. The absence of a direct path from employer fulfillment to commitment, combined with the significance of the indirect path through justice, provides evidence of a mediation effect. These findings support Guest’s (Reference Guest2004) theoretical model, which emphasizes the central role of fairness perceptions in translating employer efforts into positive attitudinal outcomes.
While these studies establish important connections between psychological contracts, distributive justice, and organizational commitment, empirical research specifically examining the mediating role of distributive justice in the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and affective organizational commitment remains scarce. Examining this mediating process may provide a deeper understanding of the drivers of affective organizational commitment, particularly in academic settings.
In higher education, where workloads, promotion opportunities, and resource allocations vary considerably, perceptions of distributive justice may play a decisive role in shaping emotional attachment to the institution. Prior research (Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter & Ng, Reference Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter and Ng2001; Cropanzano et al., Reference Cropanzano, Bowen and Gilliland2007) shows that distributive justice extends beyond tangible rewards to encompass non-monetary benefits such as recognition, academic freedom, and equitable access to research support – factors critical in academic contexts. Within this context, distributive justice can serve as a psychological lens through which academics interpret organizational actions. Although budget constraints may reduce benefits, perceptions that resources are allocated fairly can mitigate negative reactions. This aligns with Folger and Cropanzano’s (Reference Folger and Cropanzano1998) broader framework, which emphasizes the role of justice perceptions in shaping employee responses to unfavorable organizational outcomes. Furthermore, evidence from organizational behavior indicates that justice perceptions can buffer the detrimental impact of resource limitations, reinforcing the notion that distributive justice functions not only as a mediator but also as a protective factor in the employment relationship (Greenberg, Reference Greenberg2006).
Building on this perspective and based on SET, we propose that perceptions of distributive justice mediate the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and affective organizational commitment, particularly under conditions of resource scarcity. Psychological contract fulfillment may influence affective organizational commitment both directly and indirectly through perceptions of justice. Academics who perceive that their psychological contracts have been – or are likely to be – fulfilled tend to interpret this as a fair exchange, which, in turn, strengthens their affective commitment. Conversely, when psychological contracts are perceived as unfulfilled or unlikely to be fulfilled – due to unmet expectations regarding compensation, support, or promises – academics may view the exchange as unfair, perceiving that their contributions outweigh the returns. This perception of injustice can erode affective commitment.
Accordingly, we hypothesize that perceptions of psychological contract fulfillment foster higher levels of distributive justice, which subsequently enhance affective organizational commitment, even in the presence of budget constraints. In such contexts, academics may value organizational efforts to uphold the employment relationship despite financial limitations.
All of the above leads to the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4: Distributive justice mediates the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and affective organizational commitment.
The moderating role of LMX
Previous research has shown that low-quality relationships between employees and supervisors are often characterized by psychological distance, limited communication, and reduced trust (Graen, Reference Graen2003; Mulligan, Ramos, Martín & Zornoza, Reference Mulligan, Ramos, Martín and Zornoza2021). In contrast, high-quality LMX relationships are marked by mutual trust, respect, and obligation, fostering more frequent interactions and higher levels of support (Bauer & Green, Reference Bauer and Green1996; Graen & Uhl-Bien, Reference Graen and Uhl-Bien1995). These relationships provide employees with both tangible benefits – such as promotions and compensation (Wayne, Liden, Kraimer & Graf, Reference Wayne, Liden, Kraimer and Graf1999) – and intangible benefits, including recognition, autonomy, and developmental opportunities (Kim et al., Reference Kim, Laffranchini, Wagstaff and Jeung2017). As a result, high-quality LMX is consistently associated with greater job satisfaction, motivation, and organizational citizenship behaviors (Agustina & Satrya, Reference Agustina and Satrya2025; Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee & Epitropaki, Reference Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee and Epitropaki2016; Tziner et al., Reference Tziner, Felea and Vasiliu2017).
LMX has also been empirically linked to psychological contract fulfillment, perceptions of organizational justice, and affective organizational commitment (Biswas, Reference Biswas2016; Kasekende, Reference Kasekende2017; March et al., Reference March, Aplin-Houtz, Lawrence, Lane and Meriac2023; Rashid et al., Reference Rashid, Dastgeer and Kayani2018). Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated its moderating role. Biswas (Reference Biswas2016) found that high-quality LMX buffers the negative outcomes typically associated with psychological contract breach, underscoring its regulatory potential in employment relationships. Sarti (Reference Sarti2019) reported that the relationship between distributive justice and work engagement is stronger among employees experiencing high LMX compared to those reporting low LMX. This suggests that close leader–member interactions can enhance perceptions of distributive justice, thereby amplifying its positive effect on work engagement.
Similarly, Erdogan, Liden and Kraimer (Reference Erdogan, Liden and Kraimer2006) found that LMX quality shapes the relationship between organizational justice and work behaviors depending on organizational culture. In clan-type cultures – characterized by teamwork, employee involvement, and relational cohesion – high-quality LMX relationships strengthened the positive effects of perceived organizational justice on job satisfaction and performance. In contrast, in hierarchical cultures, where formal structures and control dominate, the moderating influence of LMX was diminished. These findings highlight the importance of contextual variables in analyzing social exchange processes. In academic institutions – where collaborative traditions coexist with increasing bureaucratic structures – the quality of supervisor–academic relationships may critically shape how distributive justice is perceived and how it influences affective outcomes.
Consistent with this, Buch (Reference Buch2015) found that high-quality LMX relationships buffer the negative association between organizational exchanges and affective organizational commitment.
Building on these findings, and grounded in SET, we argue that given its relational nature, LMX plays a critical moderating role in the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment, distributive justice, and affective organizational commitment in academic settings, where hierarchical structures and resource constraints coexist with individual autonomy. Within this framework, employees in high-quality LMX relationships may be more resilient to contractual inconsistencies and more likely to interpret ambiguous exchanges in a favorable light, thereby maintaining perceptions of justice and commitment. Consequently, LMX may moderate the indirect effect of psychological contract fulfillment on affective organizational commitment through perceptions of distributive justice. Specifically, when LMX is high, academics are more likely to perceive organizational exchanges as fair and supportive, amplifying the positive effects of psychological contract fulfillment on justice perceptions and, in turn, affective organizational commitment. In contrast, under conditions of low LMX, even fulfilled contracts may fail to generate strong justice perceptions, weakening the commitment response.
This reasoning aligns with conditional process theory (Hayes, Reference Hayes2013), which posits that the strength of a mediating relationship can vary according to the level of a moderating variable.
Accordingly, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 5: LMX moderates the mediating effect of distributive justice in the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and affective organizational commitment.
Methodology
Participants and procedures
The study focused on the faculty members of Spain’s 47 public universities that offer on-site teaching. The universities in the sample were included in the Integrated University Information System of the Spanish General Secretariat of Universities. These institutions, distributed throughout Spain, were selected because their faculty members are considered highly representative of the Spanish academic context. This facilitated the identification of most faculty members, but in the absence of a unified list of active academic staff, the sample framework was finally constructed from the information available from 47 Spanish departments of Economics/Financial Economics and Business Organization websites. When the information was not available on the website, the departmental heads were contacted (Miranda, Chamorro-Mera & Rubio, Reference Miranda, Chamorro-Mera and Rubio2017). The potential sample consisted of 2,454 participants, and each was sent a questionnaire and two reminders. Data collection was performed between October 2023 and January 2024. Since choosing a sampling method requires a researcher to consider multiple factors (e.g., the research question, the study methodology, knowledge about the study population, the size of the study population, the degree of similarity or differences for cases in the population, and time and/or financial constraints) and the degree of confidence desired for study conclusions along with generalizability (Elfil & Negida, Reference Elfil and Negida2017; Shorten & Moorley, Reference Shorten and Moorley2014), simple random sampling was beneficial to our study. This method allowed us to attain a satisfactory sample size. Probability sampling methods incorporate an aspect of random selection, which ensures that each case in the population has an equal likelihood of being selected (Shorten & Moorley, Reference Shorten and Moorley2014).
The questionnaire was designed in electronic format and distributed by email, obtaining 583 responses. Because the objective of the study was to explore the role played by distributive justice and leader/member relationships in affective organizational commitment, stable working conditions were considered crucial. Therefore, we asked full-time faculty members to complete the questionnaire. While employment contracts differed between respondents, all of them were long-term contracts, and all had stability in their jobs. Finally, and after a cleaning protocol for missing cases, 465 valid responses were obtained, corresponding to a response rate of 18.9%. The final sample included 57.4% males and 42.6% females. Of the respondents, 42.2% were over 50 years old, 31.4% were between 40 and 50 years old, 20.2% were between 30 and 40 years old, and 6.2% were under 30 years old.
Research instruments: measures
Measures were taken directly from previously cited research and were initially in English. A back translation method was used. In back translation, a target language version is translated back into the source language version in order to verify the translation of the research instrument. Specifically, back translation is highly recommended by experts on cross-cultural research (Brislin, Reference Brislin1970; Champman & Carter, Reference Champman and Carter1979; Werner & Campbell, Reference Werner, Campbell, Naroll and Cohen1970). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to test the validity and reliability of the measures. The analysis was performed separately, for each construct, using the structural equation modeling (SEM) software, EQS 6.1. The results and main statistics derived from the confirmatory analysis are described for each measure. The results of the CFA for each measure are shown in Table 1. Average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability data are given in Table 2. As a general rule, the factor loadings were statistically significant and had values of at least 0.7 or close to 0.7, and the AVE exceeded .5. When combined with a good Cronbach’s alpha score (Table 1), these values provide evidence of the scale’s reliability (Hair, Anderson, Tatham & Black, Reference Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black1999). Internal reliability, also known as internal consistency reliability, refers to how consistently different items within a single test or instrument measure the same construct. In simpler terms, it means that the various items on a scale or questionnaire are measuring the same thing and that the results are consistent across those items.
Table 1. Results of CFA for each of the measures
Table 2. Composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE), square correlations between variables, and HTMT criterion
In addition, for common method bias, we used the full collinearity test (Kock and Lynn, Reference Kock and Lynn2012), finding all the values to be satisfactory.
Initially, discriminant validity among all the variables was tested, using Fornell and Larcker’s (Reference Fornell and Larcker1981) criteria, which state that there is discriminant validity when the AVE from each variable is higher than the square-correlation between them (as shown in Table 2). In this case, discriminant validity between variables can be confirmed. Additionally, because a more novel approach for assessing discriminant validity was introduced by Henseler, Ringle and Sarstedt (Reference Henseler, Ringle and Sarstedt2015): the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations, we also performed this test. The HTMT is a measure of similarity between latent variables that is also used to assess discriminant validity in SEM, comparing the correlations of a construct’s items with the items of other constructs. We obtained the HTMT_Inference results by running the bootstrapping procedure. Specifically, for ‘test type’, we used the one-tailed option. Therefore, in accordance with Franke and Sarstedt (Reference Franke and Sarstedt2019), we tested whether the HTMT value was significantly below the critical value of 0.9 to establish discriminant validity. In the bootstrapping results report, we also verified whether the upper bound of the bias-corrected confidence intervals was below the critical HTMT value.
If the HTMT value is below a threshold (commonly 0.85 or 0.9), it suggests that the constructs are distinguishable, indicating discriminant validity. In our case, all of the variables achieved a satisfactory value (Table 2).
Distributive justice
This was measured using five items from Niehoff and Moorman’ (Reference Niehoff and Moorman1993) Justice Scale. These authors measured the perceived distributive justice, assessing the fairness of different work outcomes, such as pay level, work schedule, workload, and job responsibilities. Items were measured on a Likert scale from 1 to 5 (where 1 = total disagreement and 5 = total agreement). Examples of items are ‘my work schedule is fair’ or ‘I consider my workload to be quite fair’. For confirmatory purposes, item #2 (‘I think that my level of pay is fair’) was dropped. Cronbach’s alpha was satisfactory (≤.85).
Affective organizational commitment
This was measured using six items from Meyer and Allen’s Affective Organizational Commitment Scale (Meyer & Allen, Reference Meyer and Allen1997; Meyer, Allen & Smith, Reference Meyer, Allen and Smith1993). Affective organizational commitment assesses employee’s emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement within the organization. Examples of the items are, ‘I would be happy dedicating the rest of my career to this university’ and ‘I feel “emotionally united” to this university’. Cronbach’s alpha was satisfactory (≤.90).
Leader–member exchange
LMX, understood as the quality of the relationship that the leader has with each of the subordinates, was measured using LMX-7 (Graen & Uhl-Bien, Reference Graen and Uhl-Bien1995). The LMX-7 scale consists of seven items that characterize various aspects of the relationship, between supervisor and subordinate, including trust, support, and mutual respect. Examples of items are the following: (1) Does the director of your department understand the problems and needs of your work? (2) Does the director of your department recognize your potential? Cronbach’s alpha was satisfactory (≤.91).
Psychological contract fulfillment
This was measured using five items from a scale developed by Freese and Schalk (Reference Freese and Schalk2008) to assess academic beliefs or expectations, concerning the obligations they have with the university. Examples of items are the following: (1) To what extent has your university fulfilled the obligations regarding the development of your career? (2) To what extent have you fulfilled your obligations? Cronbach’s alpha was satisfactory (≤.80).
Control variables
Tenure (measured in years), age, and perception of gender discrimination were used as control variables. Perceived discrimination has been considered in distributive justice literature (Villanueva-Flores et al., Reference Villanueva-Flores, Valle-Cabrera and Bornay-Barrachina2014, Reference Villanueva-Flores, Valle and Bornay-Barrachina2017). Likewise, age and tenure have also been previously considered with regard to the psychological contract and justice (Kim et al., Reference Kim, Laffranchini, Wagstaff and Jeung2017; Tziner, Felea & Vasiliu, Reference Tziner, Felea and Vasiliu2015).
Results
Table 3 presents the correlations and descriptive statistics, such as the mean and standard deviation between this study’s variables. At the level of correlation analysis, the behavior of many variables was reasonable, as expected.
Table 3. Correlations and main descriptive statistics (n = 485).
** p < .01,
* p < .05.
To test these hypotheses (Figure 1), the linear moderated mediation test from Hayes (Reference Hayes2013, Reference Hayes2015) was used, applying PROCESS for SPSS. Specifically, model #58 was run, measuring mediation and moderation effects.
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
xsxsxs
Theoretical relationships and paths are represented in Figure 2, labeled Statistical Model. Unstandardized Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression coefficients with confidence intervals (standard errors in parentheses) are shown in Table 4. In Table 4, model 1 represents regression coefficients when the dependent variable is distributive justice (Mediator). Model 2 represents regression coefficients when the dependent variable is affective organizational commitment (Y).
Figure 2. Statistical model.
Table 4. Results for the test of linear moderated mediation
DV, dependent variable.
** p < .01,
* p < .05.
Our results support Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2. Hypothesis 1 establishes a relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and distributive justice. Table 4, model 1, shows that psychological contract fulfillment has a statistically significant coefficient (a1® = .831), finding support for Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 posits a direct relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and affective organizational commitment (Table 4, model 2), and the results show a positive and significant direct path (c′® = .511), giving support to Hypothesis 2.
The relationship between distributive justice and affective organizational commitment is represented in Hypothesis 3. Table 4, model 2, shows that this relationship is not statistically significant (b1® = .066); therefore, Hypothesis 3 is rejected.
At this point, and because Hypothesis 3 is rejected, the data show that distributive justice does not mediate the relationship between psychological contract and affective organizational commitment (Hypothesis 4). However, analysis of the fifth hypothesis offers some findings on the role of mediation and moderation.
Specifically, regarding the role played by LMX (Hypothesis 5), there is an effect of moderated mediation. As a first step, LMX moderates the relationship between psychological contract and distributive justice, strengthening this relationship. The interaction between LMX and psychological contract fulfillment on distributive justice is positive and significant (Table 4, model 1) (a3® = .136). On the other hand, LMX also moderates the relationship between distributive justice and affective organizational commitment, making such a relationship statistically significant (Table 4, model 2) (b3® = −.103).
The conditional indirect effect of psychological contract fulfillment on affective organizational commitment at values of the moderator (LMX) is shown in Table 5. There is an indirect effect of psychological contract fulfillment on affective organizational commitment through distributive justice at low levels of LMX. These results support Hypothesis 5.
Table 5. Conditional indirect effect and index of moderated mediation
To interpret the meaning of the significant moderations in the relationship, interaction plots were performed. The interaction plots for the significant moderating effects are shown in Figures 3 and 4. Specifically, in Figure 3, plots are shown for psychological contract fulfillment versus distributive justice at high and low levels of LMX (Aiken, Reference Aiken1991). High and low levels were defined as one standard deviation, above and below the mean, respectively. Higher levels of LMX will reinforce the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and distributive justice.
Figure 3. The moderating influence of LMX on the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and distributive justice.
Figure 4. The moderating influence of LMX on the relationship between distributive justice and affective commitment.
Figure 4 shows the plots for perceived distributive justice against affective organizational commitment at high and low LMX levels (Aiken, Reference Aiken1991) (Figure 3). In this case, the interaction occurs for low levels of LMX, when the relationship between distributive justice and affective organizational commitment is statistically significant.
In summary, the results show that psychological contract fulfillment has a direct and indirect effect on affective organizational commitment. Regarding the indirect effect, the relationship is explained by the role played by both perceived distributive justice and LMX. Specifically, the role played by LMX is twofold. First, high-quality LMX can reinforce the effect of psychological contract fulfillment on the distributive justice. Individuals who perceive good psychological contract fulfillment and maintain a high quality of LMX will also perceive higher levels of distributive justice. Second, the indirect effect of psychological contract fulfillment on affective organizational commitment is explained through the perception of distributive justice, when individuals have low levels of LMX. The mediator role of distributive justice is supported when individuals have low levels of LMX. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 is partially supported, and Hypothesis 5 is supported.
Concerning control variables, results indicate a negative relationship between perceived gender discrimination and affective organizational commitment. Findings also showed a positive relationship between tenure in the organization and affective organizational commitment.
Discussion and conclusion
Discussion
This study advances our understanding of how psychological contract fulfillment, distributive justice, and affective organizational commitment are interrelated, particularly under varying levels of LMX.
First, the findings reveal a direct relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and perceived distributive justice. Academics who perceive that their psychological contracts are honored are more likely to consider the allocation of organizational outcomes as fair. This result contributes to the limited empirical evidence linking these constructs and aligns with previous research (Byrne & Cropanzano, Reference Byrne and Cropanzano2001; Estreder et al., Reference Estreder, Rigotti, Tomás and Ramos2020; Tziner et al., Reference Tziner, Felea and Vasiliu2017). Notably, this relationship appears to be driven by trust in future fulfillment of obligations, even when current contributions outweigh present rewards. In academic environments, where compensation and recognition may be limited, trust in long-term reciprocity fosters a sense of distributive justice. Thus, the psychological contract may act as a temporal buffer, allowing employees to interpret present imbalances as tolerable in light of anticipated future gains.
Second, the fulfillment of psychological contracts is positively related to affective organizational commitment. This finding is particularly relevant in contexts of economic austerity, where prior studies have shown that breaches of psychological contracts diminish employees’ emotional attachment to the organization (Anvari et al., Reference Anvari, Kumpikaitė-Valiūnienė, Mobarhan, Janjaria and Hosseinpour Chermahini2023; Delegach, Klein & Katz-Navon, Reference Delegach, Klein and Katz-Navon2024). Affective commitment may represent the employee’s emotional reciprocation within the psychological contract framework. In academia, this often manifests through sustained efforts in teaching, research, and learning activities, with the expectation of long-term recognition or advancement. When institutions demonstrate reliability in fulfilling both explicit and implicit promises, they reinforce employees’ emotional investment (affective commitment), even in the face of constrained resources.
Third, contrary to some prior research (Abdullah & Al-Abrrow, Reference Abdullah and Al-Abrrow2023; Malla & Malla, Reference Malla and Malla2023; Nazir et al., Reference Nazir, Shafi, Atif, Qun and Abdullah2019), no significant direct relationship was found between perceived distributive justice and affective commitment. One possible explanation is that distributive justice may be viewed by academics as a baseline organizational expectation, rather than a motivational driver. While justice in resource allocation may be necessary, it may not be sufficient to elicit emotional commitment. In contrast, psychological contracts engage deeper personal expectations – such as autonomy, trust, and long-term growth – which appear to carry greater emotional weight in shaping affective commitment. This suggests that, in knowledge-intensive settings, relational quality and perceived trust may matter more than distributive evaluations alone.
Finally, the results support a moderated mediation model, wherein distributive justice mediates the relationship between psychological contract fulfillment and affective commitment, but only under low LMX conditions. This highlights the contextual role of relational dynamics. When leader–member relationships lack closeness, recognition, or support (Graen & Uhl-Bien, Reference Graen and Uhl-Bien1995), employees appear to rely more heavily on perceived justice to interpret their organizational experience. In such cases, distributive justice serves as a critical mechanism through which psychological contract fulfillment translates into affective commitment. This pattern aligns with SET (Blau, Reference Blau1964; Gouldner, Reference Gouldner1960), suggesting that in the absence of high-quality interpersonal reciprocity, employees tend to place greater emphasis on perceived justice when interpreting their organizational experience. These findings emphasize the importance of considering relational context as a key moderator in the development of affective organizational commitment. From a practical perspective, in settings where high-quality LMX is difficult to ensure, organizations should prioritize transparent, fair, and equitable systems of compensation and recognition to uphold employees’ affective commitment.
Theoretical implications
This study offers several theoretical contributions with broad applicability. First, the findings enrich the psychological contract literature by delving deeper into its relationship with distributive justice and confirming that fulfillment – not just breach – is an antecedent of distributive justice. Second, it advances the literature on affective commitment by examining this construct within the academic context – an understudied setting that faces organizational pressures such as budget cuts. More significantly, the study highlights the pivotal role of employment relationships in shaping employees’ attitudinal responses, demonstrating how psychological contract fulfillment influences affective commitment in times of resource constraints. Third, the study extends existing literature by introducing LMX as a moderating variable, thereby contributing to the growing body of research that investigates the conditional effects of LMX (Ishak, Naqshbandi, Islam & Haji Sumardi, Reference Ishak, Naqshbandi, Islam and Haji Sumardi2023; Martin et al., Reference Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee and Epitropaki2016). Fourth, this paper offers a novel integrative perspective by jointly examining three key employment relationship variables – psychological contract fulfillment, distributive justice, and LMX – with affective commitment, within a single model. Therefore, this is the first study to explore the distinct and interactive roles of these variables in explaining affective organizational commitment. Finally, by focusing on the constructive side of psychological contracts, the research provides a needed counterbalance to the dominant emphasis on contract breach and violation, offering a richer understanding of how positive employment experiences contribute to favorable attitudinal outcomes.
Practical implications
This study offers relevant practical implications for organizational management, particularly in academic institutions facing budgetary constraints. First, although supervisors cannot directly control employees’ subjective perceptions of psychological contract fulfillment, they can actively foster high-quality LMX relationships. Strengthening these relational bonds can enhance the positive effects of psychological contract fulfillment on perceptions of distributive justice. Therefore, organizations should invest in leadership development programs that emphasize interpersonal skills, trust-building, and individualized support. For example, supervisors should be encouraged to regularly assess the quality of their interactions with subordinates, identify barriers to relational trust, and implement tailored strategies to improve communication and mutual understanding. Second, in contexts where high-quality LMX relationships are difficult to achieve – such as in hierarchical or bureaucratic academic environments – institutions should focus more intensively on fulfilling psychological contracts and ensuring perceived fairness in the allocation of outcomes. Even when trust in leadership is low, fairness in distribution can serve as a compensatory mechanism to sustain affective commitment. Universities should, therefore, design and implement transparent, equitable, and consistent reward systems that reflect employees’ contributions and align with communicated expectations. As some authors suggest, while it may be challenging to directly influence perceptions of contract fulfillment, organizations can more feasibly manage the distribution of tangible and intangible rewards to foster perceptions of distributive justice (Kim et al., Reference Kim, Laffranchini, Wagstaff and Jeung2017).
Limitations and future research
Despite its contributions, this study is not without limitations. First, the generalizability of the findings is restricted due to the exclusive focus on the academic context, specifically within Economics/Financial Economics and Business Organization departments. Future research should consider extending the analysis to other academic units or non-academic settings, where resource availability and organizational dynamics may differ significantly. Second, the study focused solely on the affective dimension of organizational commitment. While affective commitment is a key attitudinal outcome, exploring continuance and normative commitment could offer a more comprehensive understanding of how psychological contract fulfillment and distributive justice influence different dimensions of organizational commitment. Lastly, the academic environment has unique characteristics – such as autonomy, intrinsic motivation, and long-term career paths – that may not generalize to other professional sectors. Future studies should replicate this model in diverse organizational and cultural contexts to test its robustness and external validity.
Conclusion
This study offers new insights into the mechanisms linking psychological contract fulfillment, distributive justice, and affective organizational commitment, particularly under different LMX conditions. Our findings demonstrate that perceptions of distributive justice are not only shaped by current organizational rewards but also by employees’ trust in the fulfillment of future promises. Notably, the mediating role of distributive justice is subject to the quality of the leader–member relationship, suggesting that relational context is a critical factor in shaping emotional commitment. In low-quality LMX environments, distributive justice becomes a key channel through which psychological contract fulfillment fosters affective commitment. These findings underscore the importance of both psychological and relational processes in maintaining employee commitment. For organizations, especially in academic settings with limited resources, ensuring justice and consistency in the fulfillment of obligations – whether relational or contractual – can play a pivotal role in sustaining long-term commitment and organizational trust.
Data availability statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available because they contain information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the Instituto Universitario de Investigación para el Desarrollo Social Sostenible (INDESS), Campus de Jerez de la Frontera, Cádiz.
Funding statement
This work has been co-financed by the 2014–2020 ERDF Operational Program and by the Department of Economy, Knowledge, Business at the University of the Regional Government of Andalusia, Code Numbers: FEDER-UCA18-107689 and FEDER-UPO‐1262853. This work was also supported by the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities under Castillejo Grant Number CAS18/00132.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare none.
Open access
