Search results

In the competitive retailing environment, retailers who provide service experiences that stand out from the competition can gain a competitive advantage. Increasingly, an important aspect of the service experience involves product returns, in particular, the fairness of returns policies and procedures. Previous research studies support that interpersonal justice and informational justice relate positively to consumer attitudes and behaviors. In this paper, the authors examine the relative effects of interpersonal justice and informational justice on return satisfaction, positive word-of-mouth (PWOM) and trust. Additionally, the authors examine the moderating effects of returns process convenience and returns policy restrictiveness as indicators of procedural justice.

A scenario-based experiment methodology was used to test the relationships of interest.

Results support that the effects of interpersonal justice on the outcome variables are stronger than the effects of informational justice. There is also support for a moderating effect of returns process convenience on the relationships between interpersonal justice and each outcome variable, as well as partial support for the moderating effect of returns policy restrictiveness on the relationship between interpersonal justice and PWOM.

The research extends previous work on the effects of justice on customer outcomes. Results support the importance of retailers treating customers with fairness during the returns experience and further support the benefits of providing a convenient returns experience.

This study aims to examine the unique lived experiences of international graduate students in light of COVID-19 and the recent sociopolitical climate in the USA (e.g. Black Lives Matter movement, protests against anti-Asian hate crimes and gun violence).

The authors used an exploratory qualitative design embedded within a constructivist/interpretivist paradigm. A total of 31 international health service psychology graduate students completed an online survey, 17 of whom participated in a 60-min one-on-one semi-structured interview.

Participants reported facing a range of difficulties (e.g. travel ban/inability to spend time with family, visa-related concerns, racism, decreased support) during the global pandemic and the recent sociopolitical climate in the USA. A total of 48 themes were identified and organized into six domains: COVID-19-related stress and worry, experiences of racism/discrimination, coping mechanisms, support received, recommendations for programs and higher learning institutions and advice for other international graduate students.

The recent sociopolitical climate in the US exacerbated some of the preexisting inequities for international graduate students due to their international student status and the global pandemic. Although few in number, students also spoke about some positive changes as a result of these major historical and political events. Implications for graduate education, clinical practice and policymaking are discussed.

Four reputed leaders for the coming years in the field of special education for individuals with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) each with a slightly different perspective on the field were asked to respond independently to a prompt asking what does special education mean for students with EBD and what is being done and how do we maintain tradition? The contributors' responses to the prompt are presented and then summarized across the essays. A remarkable consistency emerges across the independent essays. In addition to the tradition of providing a free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment, the contributors identify needs to support teachers serving this population. Needs in teacher training and the expertise required to meet the needs of individuals with EBD are outlined as well as potential contributions of technology to carry out specific tasks. We conclude with a call for increased advocacy for use of the knowledge that we currently possess and that which will soon be discovered to support students with EBD as well as their teachers. We also note that the contributors' names are listed alphabetically to acknowledge the equality of each person to the final product.

This study aims to explore how individual-level and organizational-level factors interact to influence pay information (PI) seeking and PI sharing preferences in PI conversations (i.e. the face-to-face communications context). The authors examine how an individual’s judgment of their pay relative to others – or pay equity perception – affects their PI seeking and PI sharing preferences and how those relationships are affected by organizationally created pay transparency policies and pay transparency practices.

Using a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design on the MTurk platform, the authors used a scenario-based prompt method to manipulate employee perceptions of pay equity and organizational pay transparency and tested those effects on employee pay disclosure preferences. The authors consider both pay policy and pay practice dimensions of pay transparency and both PI seeking and PI sharing dimensions of pay disclosure preferences. The final sample had 597 participants.

The authors find employees’ pay equity perceptions are negatively related to PI seeking behaviors and are even more so when organizations have restrictive pay transparency policies. Also, both pay transparency policy and pay transparency practice increase PI sharing preferences.

The authors provide insight into how individual perceptions drive pay disclosure motivations and the role of organizational policy and practice in influencing pay disclosure preferences within PI conversations. The authors provide insight into the antecedents that shape pay disclosure preferences, which lead to a both PI conversations among coworkers and an increase in one’s pay understanding. This study shows the contextual nature of PI seeking and PI sharing preferences, which are a motivational antecedent to pay-related sensemaking behaviors.

Healthcare workers are considered to be the most vulnerable to face mental health. Therefore, this paper aims to examine how negative leadership (despotic leadership) affects employees' psychological distress. Specifically, the authors investigated bullying behavior as mediating mechanism and hostile attribution bias as boundary condition that trigger psychological distress.

The authors collected data from 252 nurses and their immediate supervisors (as a coping strategy for common method bias) through “Google Forms” from various public and private hospitals.

The authors applied structural equation modeling and noted that despotic leadership positively affects employees' psychological distress through bullying behavior. In addition, hostile attribution bias is identified as an important factor in amplifying the effect of bullying behavior on psychological distress.

The authors collected data from high-power distance culture where negative leadership is more prevalent as compared to low-power distance culture. Their findings suggest management to discourage self-centered leaders (despotic) and employees with negative personality traits (hostile attribution bias) as these affect their mental health.

Drawing upon conservation of resources theory, this study is the first of its kind that has investigated how and when despotic leadership affects employees' psychological distress. In addition, the authors also highlighted the importance of negative personality traits (hostile attribution bias) that can amplify the association between bullying behavior and psychological distress.