Search results

Using the job–demands resources model as a guide, this study aims to expand the understanding of the boundary conditions of the relation between experienced incivility and instigated incivility. The authors do so by focusing on the unique forms of instigated incivility: hostility, gossip, exclusionary behavior and privacy invasion. Drawing from past research, the authors focus on the personal resources of agreeableness and conscientiousness as individual difference boundary conditions, and the job demands and resources of workload and perceived emotional social support, respectively, as job-related boundary conditions.

The authors test their hypotheses using two-wave survey data collected from 192 customer service workers and hierarchical moderated multiple regression.

Analyses reveal that the relation between experienced incivility and gossip, a distinct type of instigated incivility, is stronger for those who are higher in agreeableness and perceived emotional social support, and weaker for those who report experiencing higher levels of workload.

This research advances knowledge on incivility by focusing on unique forms of instigated incivility, as opposed to instigated incivility broadly, as outcomes of experienced incivility. In doing so, this research adds nuance to recent findings surrounding the moderating role of personality in the experienced incivility and instigated incivility relation. The authors also report novel findings surrounding the influence of key job demands and resources.

The purpose of this paper is to expand the research on workplace mistreatment and its effects on individual employees while taking into account the organizational setting. This cross-level study explores the interaction between the team Civility climate (CC) and individual experience of exclusion and their combined effect on the target’s organization-based self-esteem (OBSE).

In total, 251 individuals nested in 71 teams (mean team size=4.6) completed surveys. A two-way multi-level interaction model was used to test the moderation hypothesis.

The cross-level interaction between CC and exclusion was significant, which means that CC influenced the strength of the relationship between exclusion and OBSE. Specifically, it was found that the higher the group-level civility norms, the stronger the negative relationship between exclusion and OBSE.

The main limitation of this study is its cross-sectional design. All variables were self-reported and collected at one time-point.

The present study contributes to workplace mistreatment literature by using a multi-level design to examine exclusion as a predictor of OBSE and team CC as a cross-level moderator of this relationship.

This purpose of this paper is to investigate the possibility of non-linear relationships between supervisor support for stress management and intervention process ratings from a workplace stress management intervention to highlight how context shapes intervention experience.

Data from 37 nurses and nurse aides assigned to the treatment group in an occupational stress management intervention were analyzed using polynomial regression in SPSS.

A quadratic function with a U-shape best explained variance in process variables for the relationship between supervisor support for stress management at baseline and ratings of intervention relation reactions and overall perceptions of session helpfulness in both sessions and for task reactions in session 1. Those with low and high supervisor support for stress management tended to perceive the intervention favorably, which is framed in terms of the intervention compensating for or complimenting their work environment, respectively.

Although exploratory and based on a small sample, this paper lays the groundwork for future theoretically-grounded investigations of relationship between intervention context and process.

Results provide a rationale for training supervisors in stress management support as a supplement to a workplace intervention.

This paper investigates a novel molar supervisor support construct and challenges previous research that assumes that the relationship between context and intervention process or outcomes always conform to a simple linear relationship.

Using the Leader‐Member Exchange (LMX) model as a guide, this study examined the relationship between the quality of information exchange between an employee and his or her immediate supervisor and the intention to file grievances. One hundred twenty‐five unionized automotive employees completed a measure of quality of information exchange and responded to eight vignettes representing hypothetical work situations. Employees rated each vignette in terms of their intention to file a grievance if faced with that situation. It was hypothesized that employees who perceived a high quality information exchange relationship with their supervisors would be less likely to file grievances than employees who perceived a low quality information exchange relationship. When the intent to file measure was aggregated across all vignettes, the hypothesis was supported When the vignettes were categorized into three different types of grievance situations through a principal components analysis, quality of information exchange was related only to grievance filing over issues pertaining to time at work. Implications of these findings for both employee grievance research and grievance prevention are discussed.

While well-being and resilience in the workplace continue to be important areas of research, the role age plays in well-being and resilience at work and associated positive work outcomes is often ignored. In most studies age is simply treated as a control variable. In this chapter, we outline the importance of considering age in well-being and resilience research by focusing on how age may impact both of these variables and drawing on research from both the organizational psychology and developmental psychology literature. Theoretical models of these relationships are put forth, and future research directions are discussed.

Workplace abuse, interpersonal mistreatment that occurs within the victim’s work environment, has attracted considerable attention in recent years. In this chapter, we argue that problems with the conceptualization and measurement of workplace abuse have thwarted scientific progress. We identify two needs that we believe are especially pressing: (a) the need to consider the construct breadth of workplace abuse scales and (b) the need to test whether the measures of various types of workplace abuse effectively capture the unique qualities of the constructs they purport to assess. To guide our discussion of these issues, we conducted a review of the item content of several workplace abuse measures. We offer suggestions for addressing these and other conceptualization and measurement issues, and we discuss the possible implications of these issues on the study of the hypothesized predictors and consequences of workplace abuse.

Karasek's (1979) job demands-control model is one of the most widely studied models of occupational stress (de Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman, & Bongers, 2003). The key idea behind the job demands-control model is that control buffers the impact of job demands on strain and can help enhance employees’ job satisfaction with the opportunity to engage in challenging tasks and learn new skills (Karasek, 1979). Most research on the job demands-control has been inconsistent (de Lange et al., 2003; Van Der Deof & Maes, 1999), and the main reasons cited for this inconsistency are that different variables have been used to measure demands, control, and strain, not enough longitudinal research has been done, and the model does not take workers’ individual characteristics into account (Van Der Deof & Maes, 1999). To address these concerns, expansions have been made on the model such as integrating resources, self-efficacy, active coping, and social support into the model (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001b; Johnson & Hall, 1988; Demerouti, Bakker, de Jonge, Janssen, & Schaufeli, 2001a; Landsbergis, Schnall, Deitz, Friedman, & Pickering, 1992). However, researchers have only been partially successful, and therefore, to continue reducing inconstencies, we recommend using longitudinal designs, both objective and subjective measures, a higher sample size, and a careful consideration of the types of demands and control that best match each other theoretically.

In this chapter, we integrate occupational stress theory with emerging analytic and theoretical considerations related to multilevel modeling. We begin by differentiating among models at different levels, and identify the inferential errors that can inadvertently arise when applying occupational stress findings to organizations. Second, we discuss the basic framework for using multilevel modeling to study occupational stress processes over time. Finally, we apply the implications of the first two sections to a popular occupational stress model. In so doing, we show how multilevel theory and methodology can be used to enhance our understanding of occupational stress processes. The conclusion of this chapter is that multilevel theory and analytic techniques have much to offer occupational stress researchers from both a theoretical and methodological perspective.

Julian Barling received his PhD in 1979 from the University of the Witwatersrand (South Africa) and is currently associate dean with responsibility for the graduate and research programs. Julian is the author/editor of several books, including Employment, Stress and Family Functioning (1990, Wiley) and The Psychology of Workplace Safety (1999, APA). He is senior editor of the Handbook of Work Stress (2005, Sage) and the Handbook of Organizational Behavior (2008, Sage), and he is the author of well over 150 research articles and book chapters. Julian was formerly the editor of the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. In 2002, Julian received the National Post's “Leaders in Business Education” award and Queen's University's Award for Excellence in Graduate Student Supervision in 2008. He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, SIOP, APS, and the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology. He is currently involved in research on leadership, work stress, and workplace aggression.

Work enthusiasm and organizational socialization (Training, Understanding, Coworker Support, and Future Prospects) were compared in two predominantly Chinese regions, i.e., Macau (a former Portuguese territory in China) and Zhuhai in the People’s Republic of China. Data were collected from 276 (96 Macau and 180 Zhuhai) full‐time, line‐level, ethnic Chinese employees in the two regions. Results revealed the Zhuhai employees to be much more enthusiastic at work. The Zhuhai employees also evaluated Training, Understanding, and Future Prospects more highly than did the Macau employees (no differences were found for Coworker Support). Regression analyses revealed Future Prospects to be the strongest predictor of work enthusiasm in Zhuhai, while education and years on the job explained most of the variance for work enthusiasm in Macau. The results of the comparisons are discussed in terms of the similarities and differences in the cultures and economic development of the regions.