MILITARY MEDICINE, 182, 7/8:e1794, 2017
Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment in Navy Corpsmen
Stephanie Booth-Kewley, PhD; Renée G. Dell’Acqua, BA; Cynthia J. Thomsen, PhD
ABSTRACT Background: Organizational commitment is a psychological state that has a strong impact on the likelihood
that employees will remain with an organization. Among military personnel, organizational commitment is predictive
of a number of important outcomes, including reenlistment intentions, job performance, morale, and perceived readiness.
Because of the unique challenges and experiences associated with military service, it may be that organizational commitment
is even more critical in the military than in civilian populations. Despite the essential role that they play in protecting
the health of other service members, little is known about the factors that influence Navy Corpsmen’s organizational commitment.
This study investigated demographic and psychosocial factors that may be associated with organizational commitment
among Corpsmen. Methods: Surveys of organizational commitment and possible demographic and psychosocial
correlates of organizational commitment were completed by 1,597 male, active duty Navy Corpsmen attending Field Medical
Training Battalion–West, Camp Pendleton, California. Bivariate correlations and hierarchical multiple regression analyses
were used to determine significant predictors of organizational commitment. Findings: Of the 12 demographic and
psychosocial factors examined, 6 factors emerged as significant predictors of organizational commitment in the final model:
preservice motivation to be a Corpsman, positive perceptions of Corpsman training, confidence regarding promotions, occupational
self-efficacy, social support for a Corpsman career, and lower depression. Discussion/Impact/Recommendations:
Importantly, a number of the factors that emerged as significant correlates of organizational commitment in this study are
potentially modifiable. These factors include confidence regarding promotions, positive perceptions of Corpsman training,
and occupational self-efficacy. It is recommended that military leaders and policy-makers take concrete steps to address
these factors, thereby strengthening organizational commitment among Corpsmen. Further research is needed to identify
ways in which organizational commitment could be strengthened among Corpsmen.
INTRODUCTION
Given the advantages of retaining experienced employees,
and the high costs of recruiting and training new ones,
employers generally are highly motivated to maximize
employee retention. One factor that has been shown to
have a strong impact on the likelihood that individuals
will remain with an organization is their level of organizational
commitment. Organizational commitment is a psychological
state characterizing an employee’s relationship with
the organization. It has been linked with retention and other
important outcomes like job satisfaction, job performance,
absenteeism, and organizational citizenship.1,2 Although
several distinct types of organizational commitment exist
(e.g., affective, normative, continuance), evidence suggests that
affective commitment—defined as the employee’s emotional
attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the
organization—is the type of organizational commitment most
strongly associated with retention and related outcomes.2
As in the civilian sector, organizational commitment is predictive
of key outcomes among military personnel, including
reenlistment intentions, job performance, morale, and perceived
readiness.3–5 In fact, it may be that organizational commitment
is more critical in the military than in civilian populations. First,
the training provided by the military is much more extensive,
costly, and time consuming than that typically provided by
civilian employers. Second, it may be more difficult to replace
seasoned military personnel who have experience in the unique,
highly demanding, and unpredictable situations that characterize
military service than it is to replace their civilian counterparts. It
could also be argued that effects of organizational commitment
on performance and morale have more impact in the military,
where they may make the difference between life and death,
than they have in most civilian occupations.
Organizational commitment may be especially important for
military medical providers, including Navy Corpsmen. Corpsmen
play a vital role, serving as enlisted medical specialists
for both the Navy and Marine Corps. In operational settings,
Corpsmen are often the sole or primary medical provider for
the service members with whom they serve. In these settings,
Corpsmen often face tremendous challenges since they are
tasked with providing care under stressful, chaotic, harsh, and
nonsterile conditions.
Despite the crucial role that Corpsmen play in the Navy,
we found no published research examining organizational
Department of Health and Behavioral Sciences, Naval Health Research
Center, 140 Sylvester Road, San Diego, CA 92106-3521.
We are employees of the U.S. Government. This work was prepared as
part of our official duties. Title 17, U.S.C. §105 provides the “Copyright
protection under this title is not available for any work of the U.S.
Government.” Title 17, USC, §101 defines a U.S. Government work as
work prepared by a military service member or employee of the U.S.
Government as part of that person’s official duties.
Report No. 16-61 supported by the U.S. Navy Medicine Bureau of
Medicine and Surgery, under work unit no. 61113. The views expressed in
this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official
policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of the Army,
Department of the Air Force, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department
of Defense, or the U.S. Government. Approved for public release; distribution
unlimited. Human subjects participated in this study after giving
their free and informed consent. This research has been conducted in compliance
with all applicable federal regulations governing the protection of
human subjects in research (Protocol NHRC.2013.0014).
doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00316
e1794 MILITARY MEDICINE, Vol. 182, July/August 2017
Downloaded from publications.amsus.org: AMSUS – Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. IP: 203.056.241.002 on Jul 06, 2017.
Copyright (c) Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. All rights reserved.
commitment and its correlates among Corpsmen. The primary
objective of this study was to identify psychosocial
factors associated with organizational commitment in Corpsmen.
To this end, we surveyed Corpsmen to determine their
levels of organizational commitment and to assess a variety
of factors that might be associated with organizational
commitment. These included preservice motivation to be a
Corpsman, perceptions of the organization, occupational
self-efficacy, task-specific self-efficacy, perceived occupational
stress, social support for a Corpsman career, mental
health symptoms, and demographics.
Predictors of Corpsmen’s Organizational
Commitment
One factor that could potentially have an impact on organizational
commitment is preservice motivation to become a
Corpsman. For some, becoming a Corpsman has been a lifelong
dream; for others, the decision to pursue this occupation
was likely made during enlistment. Logically, individuals
with a stronger preservice motivation to become a Corpsman
would be expected to demonstrate higher levels of organizational
commitment. This expectation is consistent with findings
of research on “occupational callings,” which shows that
positive outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction) accrue for people
who regard their work as a calling.6
Positive perceptions of the organization should also predict
organizational commitment. We examined organizational perceptions
in two domains: (1) training or opportunities for professional
growth, and (2) promotion opportunities. Research in
both military7 and civilian samples8 has linked positive perceptions
of training and opportunities for professional growth with
greater organizational commitment. Similarly, positive attitudes
toward promotion in the Navy have been linked with greater
organizational commitment.9 In a meta-analysis of 22 studies,1
perceived promotion opportunities showed a moderate-tostrong
association with organizational commitment (r = 0.39).
Therefore, we hypothesized that Corpsmen with more positive
perceptions of the occupational training and promotion
opportunities provided to them by the Navy would have
stronger organizational commitment than those with less
positive perceptions.
Another factor examined in relation to organizational commitment
was self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is a personal judgment
of “how well one can execute courses of action required to
deal with prospective situations.”10 Both general and specific
types of self-efficacy have been associated with a wide range
of positive behaviors and outcomes.11,12 In this study, we
focused on occupational and task-specific self-efficacy as they
relate to the duties and responsibilities required of Corpsmen.
On the basis of research and theory,10,12–14 higher levels of
both occupational and task-specific self-efficacy were expected
to be associated with greater organizational commitment.
Perceived occupational stress is another factor that might
be expected to have an impact on organizational commitment.
It makes sense that individuals who experience a high level
of occupational stress would express a lower level of organizational
commitment. An inverse association between these
two factors has been found in a variety of samples, including
nurses,15,16 physicians at military hospitals,7 and public
sector employees.17 We expected that occupational stress
also would be negatively related to organizational commitment
among Corpsmen.
Another psychosocial factor that could play an important
role in organizational commitment is career social support.
Previous research has demonstrated that social support for
an individual’s career pursuits is associated with positive
work outcomes among civilians18,19 and military members.19,20
Given the demanding nature of military life, feeling that one’s
family and friends are supportive of one’s career may be
even more important for service members.
Individuals’ psychological health also may affect their
organizational commitment. We examined two factors related
to mental health: (1) depression, and (2) sleep problems.
Research in both civilian17 and military21 samples has
revealed an inverse association between depression and
organizational commitment. Interestingly, both state and
trait negative affect (which are strongly associated with
depression) have been associated with lower organizational
commitment.22,23 A meta-analysis by Thoresen et al23
found that depression was significantly associated with organizational
commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions.
Sleep problems also have been associated with mental
health problems, including those reflecting negative affect
(e.g., anxiety and depression).24,25 In addition, sleep problems
have been linked with lower job satisfaction26 and a host
of other negative outcomes related to health, and interpersonal
and psychological functioning.26–28 We hypothesized that both
depression and sleep problems would be negatively related
to Corpsmen’s organizational commitment.
Objective
Despite the importance of understanding factors that affect
organizational commitment among Corpsmen, this is the
first study to examine predictors or correlates of organizational
commitment in Corpsmen. The objective of this
study was to identify demographic and psychosocial factors
associated with organizational commitment in a large
sample of Navy Corpsmen.
METHODS
Subjects
The sample consisted of 1,597 active duty Navy Hospital
Corpsmen at the Field Medical Training Battalion–West
(FMTB–West) School, Camp Pendleton, California, between
February 2013 and September 2014. Participants had previously
completed training necessary to become Corpsmen,
and were undergoing additional training to become certified
as Field Medical Service Technicians, also known as Fleet
MILITARY MEDICINE, Vol. 182, July/August 2017 e1795
Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment in Navy Corpsmen
Downloaded from publications.amsus.org: AMSUS – Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. IP: 203.056.241.002 on Jul 06, 2017.
Copyright (c) Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. All rights reserved.
Marine Force (FMF) Corpsmen. FMF Corpsmen are unique
in that they are allowed to serve with Marines in the field,
in combat settings, and on other operational deployments.
However, they can also be assigned to various Navy and
Marine Corps duty stations.
Because FMTB–West only trains male Corpsmen, all
study participants were male, and because Corpsman is an
enlisted occupation, there were no officers in the study.
Paygrades (ranks) ranged from enlisted grades of E-1 to E-7;
approximately two-thirds of participants were in paygrade
E-3 (46.7%) or E-2 (20.2%). Most study participants were
young (mean = 22.5 years, standard deviation = 3.8 years,
range = 18–45 years) and had been in the Navy for a relatively
short time (mean = 1.5 years, standard deviation = 2.1 years,
range = 6 months to 17 years). Most participants had a high
school diploma only (44%) or some college/technical training
but not a 4-year degree (45%). Corpsmen participants
were predominantly white (49%), with smaller proportions
of Asian (11%), black (10%), Hispanic (6%), and other race
groups. Nearly a quarter of participants (24%) self-reported
their race/ethnicity as “mixed or multiple races.”
Procedures
The data presented in this article were collected as part of a
larger study.29,30 The goal of the larger study was to assess
the effectiveness of “highly realistic training,” an immersive
medical simulation training in which Corpsmen participated
while attending FMTB–West School. The purpose of the
training was to better prepare Corpsmen to provide medical
care in combat zones and other operational settings.
As part of this larger project, Corpsmen participants were
asked to complete pretest and post-test surveys. All data for
this study came from the pretest surveys, which were administered
about 6 weeks before the simulation training began.
Surveys were completed in large classroom settings at the
FMTB–West School. A total of eight FMTB–West classes
participated in the study, with class sizes ranging from 170
to 225. Participation in the study was voluntary, and signed
consent was provided by all participants. All Corpsmen
students received the training as part of the FMTB–West
course, regardless of whether they participated in the survey.
Study procedures were approved by the Naval Health
Research Center Institutional Review Board.
Measures
The survey assessed organizational commitment and a number
of psychosocial factors hypothesized to be associated with
organizational commitment: preservice motivation to become
a Corpsman, positive perceptions of Corpsman training, confidence
regarding promotions, occupational self-efficacy, taskspecific
self-efficacy, perceived occupational stress, social
support for a Corpsman career, depression, and sleep problems.
Information about demographic characteristics was also
gathered. Although it is likely that other factors are associated
with organizational commitment in this population, we
chose to limit our investigation to these nine psychosocial
factors, for which there were theoretical reasons to expect an
association with organizational commitment.
Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment was measured using a 4-item
affective organizational commitment scale developed by
Gade et al.4 A sample item is “I feel like ‘part of the family’
in the military.” Items were rated on a 5-point scale, ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A scale
score was created by summing across all items (α = 0.88).
Preservice Motivation to Become a Corpsman
A 5-item scale assessing preservice motivation to become
a Corpsman was developed specifically for this study. This
scale measures the degree to which participants had a longstanding
desire to become Corpsmen. Sample items include
“I knew I wanted to be a Corpsman long before I entered
the Navy” and “I have wanted to work as a medical provider
for as long as I can remember.” Respondents rated each item
on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to
5 (strongly agree). A scale score was created by summing
across all items (α = 0.79).
Positive Perceptions of Corpsman Training
Perceptions of the occupational training provided to
Corpsmen by the Navy were assessed with a single item
developed specifically for this study: “To what degree is
the Navy providing you with the necessary training to
have a successful career as a Corpsman?” Respondents
rated the item on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at
all) to 5 (extremely).
Confidence Regarding Promotions
Confidence regarding future promotions was measured using
a single item developed specifically for this study: “If you
stay in the Navy, how confident are you that you will be
promoted as high as your ability and effort warrant?”
Respondents rated each item on a 5-point scale, ranging
from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely).
Occupational Self-Efficacy
Occupational self-efficacy is confidence in one’s ability to
execute the skills and duties required by one’s occupation.
A 9-item scale assessing Corpsmen’s occupational selfefficacy
was developed for this study. This scale measures
the participant’s overall confidence that he can perform
competently as an FMF Corpsman. Sample items include
“I am confident that I will be able to provide quality medical
care under pressure” and “I am confident that I will be able
to conduct casualty triage.” Items were rated on a 5-point
scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). A scale
score was formed by summing across all items (α = 0.94).
e1796 MILITARY MEDICINE, Vol. 182, July/August 2017
Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment in Navy Corpsmen
Downloaded from publications.amsus.org: AMSUS – Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. IP: 203.056.241.002 on Jul 06, 2017.
Copyright (c) Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. All rights reserved.
Task-Specific Self-Efficacy
Task-specific self-efficacy is confidence in one’s ability to
execute specific tasks related one’s occupation. A 9-item
scale assessing Corpsmen’s task-specific self-efficacy was
developed for this study. Items asked participants to rate
how confident they felt to perform specific medical skills
that are considered core competencies for FMF Corpsmen.
Sample items include “Rate how sure you are that you could
manage hemorrhage control” and “Rate how sure you are
that you could perform airway management.” Items were
rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (I don’t think I can
do it) to 5 (I’m very sure I can do it). A scale score was created
by summing across all items (α = 0.90).
Perceived Occupational Stress
Perceived occupational stress was measured using a single
item: “During the past 12 months, how much stress did
you experience at work or while carrying out your military
duties?” Respondents rated the item on a 5-point scale,
ranging from 1 (had no stress at work in the past
12 months) to 5 (a lot). This item is from the 2008 Department
of Defense Survey of Health Related Behaviors
among Military Personnel.31
Social Support for Corpsman Career
Social support for the participant’s career as a Corpsman
was assessed using a single item: “Do your immediate
family and close friends support your Navy career plans?”
Respondents rated the item on a 5-point scale, ranging from
1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely).
Depression
Depression was assessed using the 10-item Center for Epidemiologic
Studies Depression (CES-D-10) Scale,32 a short
version of the 20-item CES-D Scale.33 Respondents rated
how often they had experienced each symptom during the
past week, ranging from 0 (rarely or none of the time) to 3
(most or all of the time). A depression score was created by
summing across all scale items (α = 0.83).
Sleep Problems
A 3-item scale assessing sleep problems was adapted from
the Insomnia Severity Index,34 a validated measure of
insomnia and sleep quality. A sample item is “How satisfied/
dissatisfied are you with your current sleep pattern?” Respondents
rated two of the three items on a 5-point scale, ranging
from 1 (none) to 5 (very severe); the other item was rated on
a 4-point scale, ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 4 (very
satisfied). A scale score was created by standardizing and
summing across the items (α = 0.72).
Demographics
The survey asked for information about participants’ tenure
in the Navy, education, age, race/ethnicity, and paygrade.
Data Analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics
for Windows, version 23 (IBM, Armonk, NY). Pearson
correlations were computed to determine the strength and
direction of associations between each pair of study variables.
Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to
determine the strongest predictors of Corpsmen’s organizational
commitment, while controlling for the effects of
other important predictors.
RESULTS
Pearson correlations between the key variables in the study
are shown in Table I. Although most of the study variables
were not highly intercorrelated, large correlations35 were
found between task-specific and occupational self-efficacy
(r = 0.46), sleep problems and depression (r = 0.47), age
and education (r = 0.48, p < 0.01), and age and tenure
(r = 0.54, p < 0.01). Consistent with predictions, all nine
of the psychosocial variables were significantly correlated
with organizational commitment (see Table I). At the zeroorder
level, the variables that were most strongly associated
with organizational commitment were those assessing positive
perceptions of the organization: confidence regarding
promotions (r = 0.39) and positive perceptions of Corpsman
training (r = 0.32). None of the three demographic variables
were significantly related to organizational commitment, so
they were not analyzed further.
In the first step of the hierarchical multiple regression
model, preservice motivation to be a Corpsman was entered;
this variable was entered ahead of the other psychosocial
factors because it reflects a preservice variable which, from
a life course perspective, occurred before the other variables
assessed. The other psychosocial variables were entered in
the second (and final) step of the model.
The results showed that preservice motivation to be a
Corpsman (entered on Step 1) was a significant predictor of
organizational commitment, accounting for 8% of the variance
(Table II). As a group, the other psychosocial variables, entered
on Step 2, accounted for an additional 23% of the variance
in organizational commitment. The final model accounted for
nearly one-third of the variance in organizational commitment
(R2 = 0.32). In the final model, the strongest predictors of organizational
commitment were preservice motivation to become
a Corpsman, confidence regarding promotions, and social support
for a Corpsman career. Corpsmen who reported a high
level of confidence regarding promotions, those with a high
level of preservice motivation to become Corpsmen, and those
with strong social support for their careers also demonstrated
greater organizational commitment. Other significant predictors
of organizational commitment in the final model included
higher occupational self-efficacy, more positive perceptions of
Corpsman training, and lower levels of depression symptoms.
A number of the psychosocial predictors that were significant
predictors of organizational commitment at the bivariate
MILITARY MEDICINE, Vol. 182, July/August 2017 e1797
Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment in Navy Corpsmen
Downloaded from publications.amsus.org: AMSUS – Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. IP: 203.056.241.002 on Jul 06, 2017.
Copyright (c) Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. All rights reserved.
level remained significant in the hierarchical regression. The
exceptions were task-specific self-efficacy, sleep problems, and
perceived occupational stress. With other variables controlled,
these three variables were no longer significant predictors of
organizational commitment.
DISCUSSION
The objective of this study was to identify psychosocial factors
associated with organizational commitment among Navy Corpsmen.
All nine psychosocial factors examined were significantly
associated with organizational commitment at the zero-order
level. Six of these psychosocial factors remained significant
in the final multivariate model: preservice motivation to be a
Corpsman, positive perceptions of Corpsman training, confidence
regarding promotions, occupational self-efficacy, social
support for a Corpsman career, and lower depression. The other
three factors (task-specific self-efficacy, perceived occupational
stress, and sleep problems) did not remain significant. None of
the demographic factors (tenure, education, and age) were associated
with organizational commitment.
As hypothesized, participants with a strong preservice
motivation to become Corpsmen demonstrated higher levels
of organizational commitment than those who did not. It
makes sense that individuals who had a long-standing desire
to become Corpsmen, or for whom the Corpsman occupation
may even have been a calling,6 would form stronger
feelings of commitment toward the Navy than those who felt
less strongly about being a Corpsman.
We examined two factors representing positive attitudes
toward the organization. Both positive perceptions toward
TABLE II. Final Model: Results of Hierarchical Stepwise Multiple Regression Predicting Organizational Commitment
Variable B SE B β t ΔR2
Step 1 0.08***
Preservice Motivation to Be a Corpsman 0.13 0.02 0.19 7.96***
Step 2 0.23***
Positive Perceptions of Corpsman Training 0.64 0.11 0.14 5.81***
Confidence Regarding Promotions 0.68 0.09 0.19 7.77***
Occupational Self-Efficacy 0.06 0.01 0.12 4.43***
Task-Specific Self-Efficacy 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.66
Perceived Occupational Stress −0.08 0.11 −0.02 −0.79
Social Support for Corpsman Career 0.80 0.10 0.18 7.75***
Depression −0.12 0.02 −0.16 5.92***
Sleep Problems 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.49
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
TABLE I. Pearson Correlations Between Study Variables
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Organizational
Commitment
—
2. Preservice Motivation
to Be a Corpsman
0.28** —
3. Positive Perceptions of
Corpsman Training
0.32** 0.11** —
4. Confidence Regarding
Promotions
0.39** 0.14** 0.29** —
5. Occupational
Self-Efficacy
0.28** 0.13** 0.18** 0.24** —
6. Task-specific
Self-Efficacy
0.14** 0.09** 0.09** 0.10** 0.46** —
7. Perceived Occupational
Stress
−0.11** −0.02 −0.12** −0.05 −0.06* −0.01 —
8. Social Support for
Corpsman Occupation
0.30** 0.10** 0.20** 0.23** 0.13** 0.04 −0.06* —
9. Depression −0.30** −0.10** −0.19** −0.23** −0.22** −0.06* 0.30** −0.16** —
10. Sleep Problems −0.17** −0.06* −0.15** −0.15** −0.10** 0.01 0.23** −0.13** 0.47** —
11. Tenure −0.03 −0.14** −0.03 −0.06* 0.02 0.10** 0.07** −0.08** 0.07** 0.15** —
12. Education −0.02 0 −0.02 0.05 0.07** 0.08** 0.04 −0.02 0.01 −0.01 0.13** —
13. Age −0.01 −0.09** 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.07** 0.03 −0.07** −0.01 0.06* 0.54** 0.48** —
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
e1798 MILITARY MEDICINE, Vol. 182, July/August 2017
Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment in Navy Corpsmen
Downloaded from publications.amsus.org: AMSUS – Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. IP: 203.056.241.002 on Jul 06, 2017.
Copyright (c) Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. All rights reserved.
occupational training and confidence regarding promotions
were significantly associated with organizational commitment.
Since career training and promotions can be viewed
as organizational rewards, these results align with conceptual
work on organizational commitment stemming from
social exchange theory, which holds that employees are
willing to attach themselves to organizations in exchange
for key rewards.28,36–38 These findings also align with research
showing that positive perceptions of training8 and attitudes
toward promotions,1,9 are associated with organizational
commitment.
In the final model, occupational self-efficacy was a
significant predictor of organizational commitment. In contrast,
task-specific self-effi
cacy was not associated with
organizational commitment in the final model. The fact that
organizational commitment was more strongly associated
with occupational self-efficacy than with task-specific selfefficacy
indicates that Corpsmen’s confi
dence regarding
their higher level occupational duties (such as performing
casualty triage) plays a key role in their commitment to the
Navy, whereas their confidence regarding specific job tasks
(such as airway management) does not. Although there is
a lack of research showing a link between occupational
self-efficacy and organizational commitment, this finding is
consistent with a meta-analysis demonstrating an association
between perceived personal competence and organizational
commitment.1 Our finding contributes to the literature by
showing the potential impact of occupational self-efficacy
on organizational commitment. However, additional research
will be needed to replicate this finding and to determine
how organizational commitment is influenced by specific
types of job-related self-efficacy.
Another key finding of this study was the positive association
between social support for a Corpsman career and organizational
commitment. This result is not surprising because
one would expect that Corpsmen with strong support from
their friends and family regarding their careers would feel
a stronger attachment to the military than those with less
support. In addition, this result is consistent with previous
research showing that social and family support for an individual’s
career is related to greater organizational commitment39
and job retention.19,20
Our finding of an inverse association between depression
and organizational commitment is consistent with previous
research.22,23 This result also aligns with research and theory
demonstrating links between both state and trait negative affect
and key organizational outcomes, such as job satisfaction,
burnout, intent to quit, and organizational commitment.17,23
Contrary to our hypothesis, perceived occupational stress
was not associated with organizational commitment, once
the effects of other predictors were controlled. This lack of
an association may have been the result of our use of a single
item to assess occupational stress. Using a more comprehensive
measure of occupational stress might have produced
a more robust relationship with organizational commitment.
Similarly, no association was found between sleep problems
and organizational commitment, once the effects of
other predictors were controlled. Although research has
linked sleep problems with lower job satisfaction and other
negative psychosocial outcomes,26,28 sleep problems do not
appear to be robustly associated with lower organizational
commitment in Corpsmen.
This is the first study to examine a broad range of psychosocial
factors in relation to organizational commitment in a
sample of Corpsmen. Our findings have a number of implications
for the military. Some of the psychosocial factors associated
with organizational commitment in this study appear to
be potentially modifiable, including confidence regarding promotions,
perceptions of Corpsman training, and occupational
self-efficacy. The association discovered between confidence
regarding promotions and organizational commitment suggests
that the Navy may want to consider taking concrete
steps to help Corpsmen with career advancement, since doing
so might strengthen their commitment to the Navy. The
association between positive perceptions of Corpsman training
and organizational commitment suggests that improving
training also could strengthen Corpsmen’s attachment to the
Navy. Lastly, the positive association between occupational
self-efficacy and organizational commitment suggests that
training and interventions designed to increase Corpsmen’s
occupational self-efficacy could be an additional way to
bolster their organizational commitment. Relatedly, results
from the larger study of which this effort was a part showed
significant increases in Corpsmen’s occupational self-efficacy
as a result of their participation in highly realistic medical
training,30 adding weight to the idea that occupational selfefficacy
is modifiable.
A number of limitations were identified in this study.
First, the study was cross-sectional, making directionality of
associations difficult to determine. Second, all data for the
study were based on self-report and its associated limitations
(e.g., social desirability bias). Third, the survey from which
we drew our data asked for identifying information. Although
confidentiality was assured, some degree of underreporting or
misreporting may have occurred. Fourth, the data for this
study were drawn from FMF Corpsmen only; the results may
or may not generalize to other types of Corpsmen. Lastly,
our sample did not include women, so our results may not
necessarily generalize to female Corpsmen.
In conclusion, this study identified a number of psychosocial
factors that were significantly associated with organizational
commitment in Corpsmen. Importantly, several of
these factors (confidence regarding promotions, perceptions
of Corpsman training, and occupational self-efficacy) are
potentially modifiable. We recommend that military leaders
and policy-makers take concrete steps to address these
factors, thereby strengthening organizational commitment
among Corpsmen. We also recommend that future research
be aimed at clarifying the nature and impact of these factors
on organizational commitment in Corpsmen. Research
MILITARY MEDICINE, Vol. 182, July/August 2017 e1799
Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment in Navy Corpsmen
Downloaded from publications.amsus.org: AMSUS – Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. IP: 203.056.241.002 on Jul 06, 2017.
Copyright (c) Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. All rights reserved.
is also needed to identify additional ways in which organizational
commitment could be strengthened in this population.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge Isabel Altarejos, Robyn Highfill-
McRoy, and the leadership and staff of the Field Medical Training
Battalion–West, Camp Pendleton, for assistance with the study. This
research was supported by the U.S. Navy Medicine Bureau of Medicine
and Surgery (BUMED), Washington, DC, under Work Unit No. 61113.
REFERENCES
1. 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.
2. Meyer JP, Stanley LH, Herscovitch L, Topolnytsky L: Affective, continuance,
and normative commitment to the organization. J Vocat
Behav 2002; 61(1): 20–52.
3. Allen NJ: Organizational commitment in the military: a discussion of
theory and practice. Mil Psychol 2003; 15(3): 237–53.
4. Gade PA, Tiggle RB, Schumm WR: The measurement and consequences
of military organizational commitment in soldiers and spouses.
Mil Psychol 2003; 15(3): 191–207.
5. Karrasch AI: Antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment.
Mil Psychol 2003; 15(3): 225–36.
6. Wrzesniewski A, McCauley C, Rozin P, Schwartz B: Jobs, careers, and
callings: people’s relations to their work. J Res Pers 1997; 31(1): 21–33.
7. Kim SW, Price JL, Mueller CW, Watson TW: The determinants of
career intent among physicians at a U.S. Air Force hospital. Hum Relat
1996; 49(7): 947–76.
8. Tansky JW, Cohen DJ: The relationship between organizational support,
employee development, and organizational commitment: an empirical
study. Human Resource Development Quarterly 2001; 12(3): 285–300.
9. Bann CM, Williams-Piehota PA, Whittam KP: Development and validation
of the Navy Climate Index. Mil Psychol 2011; 23(3): 253–71.
10. Bandura A: Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol
1982; 37(2): 122–47.
11. Burns GN, Christiansen ND: Self-efficacy in the workplace: linking
personality to domain-specific efficacy beliefs. Int J Select Assess 2011;
19(4): 429–34.
12. Stajkovic AD, Luthans F: Self-efficacy and work-related performance: a
meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 1998; 124(2): 240–61.
13. Bandura A, Caprara GV, Barbaranelli C, Gerbino M, Pastorelli C: Role
of affective self-regulatory efficacy in diverse spheres of psychosocial
functioning. Child Dev 2003; 74(3): 769–82.
14. Gecas V: The social psychology of self-efficacy. Annu Rev Sociol
1989; 15, 291–316.
15. Glazer S, Kruse B: The role of organizational commitment in occupational
stress models. Int J Stress Manage 2008; 15(4): 329–44.
16. Newton C, Teo ST, Pick D, Yeung M, Salamonson Y: Flexibility in
change practices and job outcomes for nurses: exploring the role of subjective
fit. J Adv Nurs 2013; 69(12): 2800–11.
17. Payne RL, Morrison D: The differential effects of negative affectivity
on measures of well-being versus job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. Anxiety Stress Coping 2002; 15(3): 231–44.
18. Baruch-Feldman C, Brondolo E, Ben-Dayan D, Schwartz J: Sources of
social support and burnout, job satisfaction, and productivity. J Occup
Health Psychol 2002; 7(1): 84–93.
19. Huffman AH, Casper WJ, Payne SC: How does spouse career support
relate to employee turnover? Work interfering with family and job satisfaction
as mediators. J Organ Behav 2014; 35(2): 194–212.
20. Lucas JW, Segal DR, Whitestone Y, Segal MW, White MA, Mottern
JA: The role of recruit division commanders in graduation from U.S.
Navy recruit training. Mil Psychol 2010; 22(4): 369–84.
21. Meyer JP, Kam C, Goldenberg I, Bremner NL: Organizational commitment
in the military: application of a profile approach. Mil Psychol
2013; 25(4): 381–401.
22. Choi D, Oh IS, Colbert AE: Understanding organizational commitment:
a meta-analytic examination of the roles of the five-factor
model of personality and culture. J Appl Psychol 2015; 100(5):
1542–67.
23. Thoresen CJ, Kaplan SA, Barsky AP, Warren AP, De Chermont K:
The affective underpinnings of job perceptions and attitudes: a metaanalytic
review and integration. Psychol Bull 2003; 129(6): 914–45.
24. Alvaro PK, Roberts RM, Harris JK: A systematic review assessing
bidirectionality between sleep disturbances, anxiety, and depression.
Sleep 2013; 36(7): 1059–68.
25. Baglioni CB, Battagliese GF, Feige B, et al: Insomnia as a predictor of
depression: a meta-analytic evaluation of longitudinal epidemiological
studies. J Affect Disord 2011; 135(1–3): 10–9.
26. Scott BA, Judge TA: Insomnia, emotions, and job satisfaction: a
multilevel study. J Manage 2006; 32(5): 622–45.
27. Fortier-Brochu E, Beaulier-Bonneau S, Ivers H, Morin CM: Insomnia
and daytime cognitive performance: a meta-analysis. Sleep Med Rev
2012; 16(1): 83–94.
28. Roberts RE, Roberts CR, Duong HT: Chronic insomnia and its negative
consequences for health and functioning of adolescents: a 12-month
prospective study. J Adolescent Health 2008; 42(3): 294–302.
29. Booth-Kewley S, McWhorter SK: Highly realistic, immersive training
for Navy Corpsmen: preliminary results. Mil Med 2014; 179(12):
1439–43.
30. Booth-Kewley S, McWhorter SK, Dell’Acqua RG, Altarejos IV,
Thomsen CJ: Evaluation of Highly Realistic Training for Navy
Corpsmen: Results for Field Medical Training Battalion-West. Technical
Report: 15–34. San Diego, CA, Naval Health Research Center,
2015. Available at http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a624707.pdf.
AD10000174; accessed July 27, 2016.
31. Bray RM, Pemberton MR, Hourani LL, et al: 2008 Department of
Defense Survey of Health Related Behaviors Among Active Duty Military
Personnel. RTI Report R10940-FR. Research Triangle Park, NC,
Research Triangle Institute, 2009. Available at http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/
tr/fulltext/u2/a527178.pdf. ADA527178; accessed July 27, 2016.
32. Andresen EM, Malmgren JA, Carter WB, Patrick DL: Screening for
depression in well older adults: evaluation of a short form of the
CES-D. Am J Prev Med 1994; 10(2): 77–84.
33. Radloff LS: The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for
research in the general population. Appl Psych Meas 1977; 1(3):
385–401.
34. Bastien CH, Vallières A, Morin CM: Validation of the Insomnia Severity
Index as an outcome measure for insomnia research. Sleep Med
2000; 2(4): 297–307.
35. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Ed. 2.
Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.
36. Blau PM: Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York, NY,
Wiley, 1964.
37. Mottaz CJ: Determinants of organizational commitment. Hum Relat
1988; 41(6): 467–82.
38. Mowday RT, Steers RM, Porter LW: The measurement of organizational
commitment. J Vocat Behav 1979; 14(2): 224–47.
39. Wayne JH, Casper WJ, Matthews RA, Allen TD: Family-supportive
organization perceptions and organizational commitment: the mediating
role of work-family conflict and enrichment and partner attitudes.
J Appl Psychol 2013; 98(4): 606–22.
e1800 MILITARY MEDICINE, Vol. 182, July/August 2017
Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment in Navy Corpsmen
Downloaded from publications.amsus.org: AMSUS – Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. IP: 203.056.241.002 on Jul 06, 2017.
Copyright (c) Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S. All rights reserved.
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner.
Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.