Search results

The purpose of the current research is to examine the crucial role of employees' perception of an incivility norm in predicting supervisors' incivility behaviors, which in turn, results in employees enacting incivility toward their coworkers and employees' emotional exhaustion.

In Study 1, an experience sampling method (a daily-diary approach) in which 143 male participants from several construction sites completed a total of 1,144 questionnaires was used . In Study 2, cross-sectional data from 156 male employees working in a manufacturing organization was collected. In Study 3, a quasi-experiment was conducted in which 33 and 36 employees were assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively.

In Studies 1 and 2, it was revealed that employees are likely to experience their supervisor’s incivility behaviors when perceiving such incivility behaviors are more acceptable within the organization (incivility norm). Further, once employees experience incivility from their supervisor, they are more likely to enact incivility toward their coworkers and experience emotional exhaustion. In Study 3, changing organizational policies via implementing grievance procedures was effective in improving the study’s outcome variables.

Incivility norms predict some negative work outcomes such as incivility behaviors as both a victim and instigator, and emotional exhaustion. Further, reducing an adverse organizational norm (i.e. incivility norm) via instituting grievance procedures was effective in reducing incivility behaviors and emotional exhaustion.

This paper highlights an assignment in a combination upper-division undergraduate and graduate civic leadership class at a Midwestern state comprehensive university. The three-part assignment challenges students’ critical thinking skills and research capabilities while simultaneously necessitating the exploration of contrasting viewpoints on contentious issues.

Intentionally exposing students to diverse perspectives in a controlled environment.

We posit that the severity and frequency of these issues can be mitigated through focused efforts.

Students are better prepared to engage in civil debate on controversial topics, which continuously divide our communities, after completing a class using this pedagogical strategy.

This study examined how likeminded Facebook comments with incivility and without supporting evidence influence readers' evaluations of the commenter and online political participation intention. This study also investigated whether the indirect effect of exposure to uncivil comments and comments without evidence on online political participation through evaluations of the commenters is contingent on the strength of partisanship.

The study used a 2 (uncivil comments vs civil comments) × 2 (comments without supporting evidence vs comments with supporting evidence) factorial design with a scenario about reading similar viewpoints about the gun control issue in Facebook comments.

The results showed that compared to exposure to civil agreeing comments, exposure to uncivil likeminded comments resulted in higher levels of negative evaluations of the commenters, which in turn decreased willingness to participate in political activities online. Exposure to comments without evidence led to more negative evaluations of the commenters, but it did not significantly influence online political participation. In addition, the strength of partisanship did not significantly moderate the indirect effect of exposure to uncivil comments and comments without evidence on online political participation through evaluations of the commenters.

Although previous studies have demonstrated the significant effects of incivility and reasoned argument, little is known about whether and how people evaluate ingroup members' comments that are uncivil and lacking reasoned arguments. Most of these studies have examined incivility in political contexts, but few have extended the context to the effect of likeminded comments, especially when the comments are uncivil and lack supporting evidence. The current study aims to fill this gap in the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the mediating effects of transformational and transactional leadership styles on the relationship between organizational ethics and workplace incivility.

The study employed cross-sectional survey design. Data were obtained from 209 employees from the telecommunication sector. The structural equation model was employed as the analytical tool to test the hypotheses of the study.

Organizational ethics was negatively related to workplace incivility. Both transformational and transactional leadership styles mediated the relationship between organizational ethics and workplace incivility.

Human resource developers and managers can employ, appraise, train and develop managers who can ethically demonstrate transactional, and transformational leadership behaviors to deal with workplace incivilities.

The paper makes an important contribution to the existing organizational literature by establishing the relevance of transformational and transactional leadership styles as mediators of the nexus between organizational ethics and workplace incivility in the telecommunication sector.

The purpose of this study was to test a mediated-moderated model with revenge cognitions as a coping mechanism through which experienced incivility leads to perpetrated incivility. The authors further explore the role of organizational climate for incivility.

Two studies were tested utilizing ordinary least squares (OLS) regression and Hayes (2017) process for mediation and moderation. Study 1 was completed by 321 employees, and study 2 was completed by 197 employees each from across many occupations.

Study 1 results indicate support for a positive relationship between experienced incivility and perpetrated incivility. Study 2 results indicate support for a mediated-moderated relationship where experienced incivility was indirectly associated with incivility perpetration through revenge, and the perception of an incivility climate moderated this relationship.

This is the first study to examine revenge as an explanatory mechanism for responding to incivility. It addresses concerns about revenge cognitions to experiencing incivility and the role climate perceptions play in shaping whether an individual will reciprocate with an uncivil act. The authors’ results accentuate the need for organizations to decrease or eradicate incivility so that their employees can evade the associated adverse outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to present a quantitative and qualitative synthesis of the diverse academic proposals and initiatives for preventing and eliminating hate speech on the internet.

The foundation for this study is a systematic review of papers devoted to the analysis of hate speech. It has been conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol and applied to an initial corpus of 436 academic texts. Having implemented the suitability, screening and inclusion criteria, this corpus was refined to a sample of 74 articles.

The main subject categories studied in this corpus of academic research are legal issues and social media. In the majority of the articles, the use of hate speech via social media is associated with five typologies: religion, cyber racism, political slurs, misogyny and attacks on the LGTBI community. The absence of ethical reflection is one of the major shortcomings of IT-focused research and analysis devoted to online hate speech.

To date various systematic reviews have been presented, and they focus on detecting or describing hate speech. These have used either the search appraisal synthesis analysis framework or the Cochrane network. The PRISMA protocol was applied for this study, and both Scopus and texts in German were included. To date no major, rigorous systematic review has been undertaken of proposals to combat hate speech.

The link between hate speech and poverty has not been studied in depth within the academic sphere. Tolerance and ethical compassion are not granted the attention they merit when it comes to analysing the phenomenon of hate speech.

The paper provides a theoretical framework for interdisciplinary accounting scholars interested in performances of accountability in front of live audiences.

This is a processual case study of “Falkirk in crisis” that covers the period from September 2021 to September 2022. The focus of this paper is two-fan-Q&A sessions held in October 2021 and June 2022. Both are naturally occurring discussions between two groups such as are found in previous research on routine events and accountability. This is a theoretically consequential case study.

A key insight of the paper is to identify the practical and symbolic dimensions of accountability. The paper demonstrates the need to align these two dimensions when responding to questions: a practical question demands a practical answer and a symbolic question requires a symbolic answer. Second, the paper argues that most fields contain conflicting logics and highlights that a complete performance of accountability needs to cover the different conflicting logics within the field. In this case, this means paying full attention to both the communitarian and results logics. A third finding is that a performance of accountability cannot succeed if the audience rejects attempts to impose an unpalatable definition of the situation. If these three conditions are not met, the performance is bound to fail.

An important theoretical coontribution of the study is the application of Jeffery Alexander’s work on political performance to public performances of accountability.

The phenomenon explored in the paper (what the authors term “grassroots accountability”) has broad applicability to any situation in organizational or civic life where the power apex of an organization is required to engage with a group of informed and committed stakeholders – the “community”. For those who find themselves in the position of the fans in this study, the observations set out in the empirical narrative can serve as a useful practical guide. Attempts to answer a practical complaint with a symbolic answer (or vice versa) should be challenged as evasive.

This paper studies an engagement of elite actors with ordinary (or grassroots) actors. The study shows important rules of engagement, including the importance of respecting the power of practical questions and the need to engage with these questions appropriately.

This paper offers a new vista for interdisciplinary accounting by synthesizing the accountability literature with the political performance literature. Specifically, the paper employs Jeffery Alexander’s work on practical and symbolic performance to study the microprocesses underpinning successful and unsuccessful performances of accountability.

First, with real-life examples and current research, this study aims to demonstrate the existence of various forms of ostracism (linguistic, gender, social and workplace). Second, following the “need-threat model,” this research addresses the previously unaddressed topic of coping with, reducing, mitigating or curbing workplace ostracism. Moreover, the researchers also proposed a “multiplying effect model” of ostracism.

Data was gathered from 199 service sector employees. The NVivo software is used for the thematic analysis of qualitative data(suggestions) gathered using open ended question on how to mitigate/reduce/curb ostracism.

The results generated were the suggestive measures, which were further categorized under three major themes: individual, society and organizational. The measures to reduce, mitigate and stop the practices of workplace ostracism can be initiated on all these three levels.

This is the only study that addresses the subject of decreasing, alleviating or eliminating workplace ostracism and explains the compounding effect of ostracism by suggesting a multiplying effect model. The study will pique the interest of the government and legislators to propose legal measures to prevent ostracism and achieve sustainable development goals (gender equality and reduced inequalities. The study’s practical, social, theoretical and managerial utility are discussed in the implications section.

This chapter presents a critical reflection on delivering a lecture on the impacts of colonialism to a cohort of predominantly white, undergraduate students in the UK. This chapter provides an overview of the lecture, including its key content and how it built on a wider programme of learning. It then discusses student reactions to the lecture content, reviews the literature on teaching sensitive subjects, highlights what pedagogues in Higher Education (HE) can learn from this literature, and explores both teacher and student positionality. The chapter concludes that pedagogues in HE should pursue the teaching of sensitive subjects and not ‘give in’ to student discomfort. Not creating the conditions to discuss such issues in learning spaces ultimately sides with existing structures of power and privilege in HE that should be challenged. However, strategies need to be put in place to overcome students’ fears of discussing sensitive subjects. These strategies include pedagogues building up trust, facilitating open dialogue, and reflexively exploring positionality. These present both students and teachers with the opportunity to recognise and transform their own biases, perceptions, and attitudes to facilitate deeper and more democratic learning; and challenge existing structures of privilege in HE that benefit more powerful groups.