Journal of Applied Psychology最新文献

Our recent article on congruence research (Yao & Ma, 2023) advocated the need to adopt a holistic approach to studying congruence effects and to developing stronger congruence theories. Matta and Frank (2025) offered an insightful commentary on our article, highlighting theoretical and empirical/inferential concerns. These concerns include (a) whether the exact correspondence effect is the theoretical goal and (b) when researchers should consider applied conditions or reported conditions in congruence research. While Matta and Frank acknowledged the value of the holistic perspective, they recommended testing one's hypothesized form of congruence as the goal of future congruence research. We thank Matta and Frank for bringing up these issues. These issues have gained increased relevance and urgency especially after Yao and Ma (2023) identified several common issues in published congruence studies and offered suggestions for improvements. This reply is intended to clarify and extend our arguments on the holistic perspective, illustrating how this perspective can help address the concerns they raised and further advance congruence research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Yao and Ma (2023) recently reviewed and reanalyzed 31 studies published in top-tier journals utilizing polynomial regression and response surface methods. Their work offers a useful holistic framework for how to test and categorize various forms of congruence; however, they ultimately advance cautionary conclusions about the extent to which 28 of the 31 studies provide "evidence of congruence" and call into question whether the practical implications of these studies are valid (p. 446). In this commentary, we clarify this inference stems largely from theoretical and empirical oversights made in Yao and Ma (2023). We bring to light issues surrounding (a) proposals that exact correspondence is the theoretical goal (despite 26 of the 31 studies explicitly hypothesizing deviation from that form) and (b) suggestions that authors did not adequately consider empirics they did report. Most critically, Yao and Ma suggested their reanalysis provides conclusions that differ from the reviewed studies in 28 (of 31) instances. We demonstrate that, when one accounts for the form of congruence the authors explicitly theorized, the type of congruence supported as well as the inferences discussed in the studies differ from those in Yao and Ma's reanalysis in only nine of 31 studies (rather than 28). This commentary seeks to rectify the theoretical, empirical, and inferential misconceptions in Yao and Ma (2023) that may lead readers to inaccurately assess past work and threaten future work in this vein. We outline a path for scholars interested in applying this method moving forward. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Employees' novel ideas often do not get recognized or valued by their managers, thus precluding these ideas from benefiting the organization. Drawing on the social-cognitive model of creativity evaluation (Zhou & Woodman, 2003) and integrating it with a social network (N/W) lens, this article investigates how characteristics of the social networks of managers and employees play a role in influencing managers' valuation of and willingness to implement novel employee ideas. In three studies-an experimental study manipulating idea novelty and the functional diversity of idea evaluators' (i.e., managers') network, and two network field studies (with managers evaluating actual product ideas generated by employees)-we document how managers generally disfavor novelty and, therefore, are unwilling to implement novel yet useful ideas. However, we find that managers' advice network diversity and employees' centrality in the advice network among their peers help mitigate this negative effect. Managers are able to better appreciate the value of novel ideas when they have more diverse networks and when idea-proposing employees have high centrality in their peer network. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Speaking up on social injustices may help create more just and inclusive organizations. Yet, many people choose to remain silent. In this article, we test how managerial silence on injustices can shape impressions of a manager's lack of support for an outgroup. In Study 1, we surveyed employees and found that many noticed their managers' silence and recounted that such silence influenced how they perceived their managers. We then conducted nine experimental studies (Studies 2-6, Supplemental Studies 1-4) to test how observers' perceptions of managers who engage in silence on an outgroup injustice depend on whether managers have spoken up or remained silent in the past. We demonstrate that when a manager engages in selective silence by previously speaking up on an ingroup injustice but remains silent on an outgroup injustice, observers perceive the manager as harboring greater bias and as less supportive of the outgroup than if they remained totally silent on both issues. In contrast, when a manager engages in selective silence by previously speaking up on an outgroup injustice but then remains silent on a second outgroup injustice, observers perceive the manager as generally supportive of social justice and as more supportive of the second outgroup than if they remained totally silent on both issues. We discuss implications for speaking up and remaining silent on injustices in the workplace. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Despite Americans' recent heightened awareness of racial inequality, anti-Asian racism at work remains underrecognized and largely unaddressed. In this research, we aim to understand why White bystander coworkers may fail to confront anti-Asian racism. Integrating the moral exclusion perspective and research on racial positions, we propose that due to perceiving Asian Americans as more foreign than other non-White coworkers, White coworkers are less likely to feel anger and engage in confrontation when witnessing anti-Asian racism at work. We first conducted a survey study (Study 1), demonstrating the external validity of the phenomenon that White coworkers are less likely to confront racism when the victim is Asian American versus Black. We then conducted two experiments (Studies 2 and 3) with a realistic, interactive design and behavioral measures of confrontation, supporting our hypothesized mechanisms (i.e., perceived target foreignness and anger). Study 3 further generalized our theory by including Hispanic/Latinx American targets as an additional comparison group and showing that the relative perceived foreignness among Asian American, Hispanic/Latinx American, and Black targets reduced White coworkers' anger and confrontation. We then conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of our work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Organizations increasingly recognize the importance of including neurodivergent people (e.g., those with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD], autism, dyslexia) in the workforce. However, research suggests that some selection tools (e.g., measures of conscientiousness) show lower means for those with ADHD, which may carry implications for personnel selection. The three studies reported here address three questions: (1) What is the magnitude of ADHD-based differences in conscientiousness, and are these differences driven by facets with high or low job relevance? (2) Could reframing conscientiousness items within work contexts attenuate group mean differences in conscientiousness? And (3) do work-specific and general conscientiousness measures have different measurement properties for respondents with ADHD? Study 1 surveyed 291 undergraduates, finding those with ADHD scored significantly lower on global conscientiousness and its facets. Study 2 (a mixed-design experiment) had 317 employees complete a work-specific and a decontextualized set of conscientiousness items. Using work-specific conscientiousness items reduced differences in conscientiousness by ADHD status. Study 3 (a between-subjects design, N = 515) experimentally increased the stakes of survey administration to approximate a selection context. Mean differences by ADHD status were present on both work-specific and general items for global conscientiousness and most facets, even under high stakes. However, these results are qualified by findings of measurement noninvariance on general and work-specific conscientiousness facet measures, suggesting scale mean differences by ADHD status may be driven by item content rather than construct-level differences. Together, the findings reinforce a need for ongoing investigation into the implications of using conscientiousness assessments with neurodivergent people. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Existing research presents mixed perspectives on the impact of abusive supervision climate on team processes and effectiveness. This discrepancy prompts an important question: when, why, and how does abusive supervision climate become more or less detrimental to teams? By integrating the social functional perspective of gossip with recent theoretical advancements on abusive supervision climate, we develop a novel theoretical model to explain how leader-targeted negative team gossip-defined as the extent to which team members share negative evaluations of the leader's behaviors with each other when the leader is absent-can mitigate the adverse effects of abusive supervision climate on teams. Our model posits that leader-targeted negative team gossip serves its social function in two key ways: (a) It diminishes team members' perception of the leader as a role model, thereby reducing the influence of abusive supervision climate on team aggressive behavior, and (b) it fosters perceived similarity among team members regarding their negative attitudes toward the leader, which lessens the impact of abusive supervision climate on team affective trust. We further argue that these buffering effects of leader-targeted negative team gossip have significant downstream implications for team effectiveness, specifically in terms of team performance and team voluntary turnover. Our model was tested using two multiwave, multisource field studies employing a round-robin design, with samples of 111 and 237 work teams, respectively. The results largely supported our model. We conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of our findings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Promoting internal employees to managerial positions (internal sourcing) is a popular employee retention tactic. Although some research indicates that internal sourcing reduces voluntary turnover, conflicting evidence suggests that internal sourcing strategies make employees more difficult to retain in strong job markets (i.e., when job opportunities are plentiful relative to job seekers) because promotions increase an employee's external marketability. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic-a global exogenous shock that triggered an event chain characterized by a weak job market followed by a historically strong one-provided a unique opportunity to test these competing perspectives. Drawing upon event system theory and the unfolding model of turnover, we argue that internal sourcing creates positive perceptions among employees about their employer, making them less inclined to seek external opportunities during periods of heightened employee mobility. Specifically, we predict that internally sourced employees perceive lower levels of employment threat and higher levels of organizational support than those hired externally, which mitigates their turnover risk in strong job markets. We tested these predictions in two studies: a longitudinal field study involving 11,072 restaurant managers who were newly promoted or hired into their roles in the years surrounding the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the strong job market that followed and an experiment designed to mirror the field study conditions, in which we examined the psychological mechanisms underlying this phenomenon. Collectively, the results of our studies support our predictions, offering valuable insights into the effects of internal versus external sourcing on employee retention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

The predominant view in the employee proactivity literature highlights the importance of personality as well as a trio of agentic forces-namely, "can do," "reason to," and "energized to" motivation-that drive employee proactive behavior. Complementing existing theoretical frameworks, we introduce the concept of proactivity permission, defined as an employee's tacit perception of the extent to which they are "allowed to" perform proactive behaviors at work. In this article, we investigate the psychological experience of proactivity permission. Directly drawn from the dominance theory of deontic reasoning, we model a set of individual (employee status, psychological entitlement), relational (leader-member exchange), and group-level predictors (organizational rule consistency, normative tightness) of proactivity permission and demonstrate the construct's value in predicting proactive behavior over and above many well-established antecedents from the literature. In a field study of 388 employees and 110 supervisors in 35 organizations, we found support for our predictions. We discuss implications of our work for the literature on employee behavior and proactive work behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

The literature on psychological contracts has focused on employees' perceptions of their employers' obligations, but not on employees' perceptions of their own obligations. Hence, perceived general obligation has seldom been theorized. This study argues that workplace support (i.e., from the organization, supervisors, and coworkers) and morally relevant traits (i.e., moral identity, conscientiousness, and agreeableness) predict perceived general obligation, that perceived general obligation predicts performance outcomes, and that the effects vary across cultures. Meta-analytic data collected from 148 samples (N = 45,671) provide preliminary support for the proposed relationships. I also examine the incremental validity of perceived general obligation in predicting performance outcomes beyond other correlates (e.g., normative commitment, positive and negative affect), the mediating role of perceived general obligation in its nomological network, and alternative models for linking the study variables. This study therefore illustrates the value of perceived general obligation in psychological contract research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).