Journal of Applied Psychology最新文献

Although research has identified the negative experiences and attitudes of individuals currently holding dirty jobs, it remains unclear whether holding these jobs relates to future career outcomes for individuals once they leave their dirty work roles. Drawing on the public and self-stigma model, we argue the outcomes of dirty work do not cease after employees exit dirty jobs but extend to predict future career success. We tested our hypotheses using a multidecade nationally representative longitudinal sample, a simulated hiring experiment, and a qualitative study of previous dirty workers. The results indicate individuals with career histories that included dirty work experience both public and self-stigma, which relates to lower income and prestige in future jobs as well as a higher likelihood and longer length of unemployment between jobs, compared to individuals with no previous dirty jobs. Moreover, the negative associations with individuals' future career outcomes were shown to be stronger with greater amounts of dirty work experience previously accumulated throughout their careers (i.e., the number of prior dirty jobs, total length of dirty work, dirtiness of jobs held). These findings suggest deleterious outcomes of holding dirty work remain even after employees leave those roles, shedding light on the enduring associations between stigmatized work experiences and individuals' future career success. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Working parents constitute a substantial segment of the workforce. Nevertheless, misconceptions surrounding how parental role impacts working parents, particularly working mothers, have perpetuated stigma and workplace discrimination. To better understand the contributions of parents in professional contexts, we developed the construct of family-centered symbolic meaning of work (FCSMW), which captures individuals' cognitive orientation to construe work meaning through its symbolic relevance to family. Specifically, it refers to individuals' perception of their work as a vehicle for expressing their professional ethics and principles to their family and serving as role models. We then draw upon self-construal theory to theorize that, in comparison to nonparents, working parents are more likely to develop higher FCSMW. We further posit that the positive association between parental status and FCSMW is more pronounced for women than for men. Additionally, we argue that FCSMW positively correlates with employees' display of exemplary behaviors at work, such as increased work effort and organizational citizenship behavior. Finally, we propose that the indirect effects of parental status on work outcomes via FCSMW are stronger for women than men. To assess our proposed model, we first developed and validated a scale for measuring FCSMW. We then tested our hypotheses using three sets of data: two multisource, field samples from China, and one field sample from the United States, all of which supported our hypotheses. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Existing research implicitly assumes that disclosing one's positive events-known as capitalization-is socially valuable in the workplace because such events are work-related and therefore relevant to coworkers and organizational goals. Indeed, management research has focused on how disclosers of positive work events and their coworkers feel about themselves. Broadening the focus of workplace capitalization to disclosure of positive nonwork events, which we refer to as nonwork-work interpersonal capitalization, we draw from boundary theory to investigate whether disclosers gain and/or lose social value at work because such capitalization is evaluated against normative expectations around the work-nonwork boundary. Specifically, we theorize that nonwork-work interpersonal capitalization carries mixed reputational implications for disclosers in terms of how they are evaluated by coworkers (i.e., perceived as other-focused and/or distracted from work) and, in turn, how coworkers spread evaluative information of disclosers to others (i.e., in terms of positive and/or negative workplace gossip about disclosers). Moreover, we propose that such reputational implications will be moderated by the discloser's workplace status. We test our model using a source- and time-separated field study (Study 1) and an experimental causal chain design (Study 2). Both studies showed that disclosers of positive nonwork events are more likely to be perceived as other-focused and thereby become targets of positive gossip. Across both studies, the effect of nonwork-work interpersonal capitalization on being perceived as distracted was stronger for lower status employees, who in turn were more likely to be gossiped about negatively. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Disability bias is ingrained in how individuals speak, and its impact can be widespread. When biased language is used in recruitment, it could impact application rates of diverse and qualified applicants. This article examines the prevalence and impact of biased (ableist) and inclusive (equal employment opportunity [EEO] and accommodation statements) language on individuals with and without disabilities. In Study 1, a content analysis of 1886 job ads found that ableist language was present in 84.09% of the job ads, whereas EEO and accommodation statements were only present in 19.25% and 9.28% of job ads, respectively. Study 2 examined the effect of biased and inclusive language and found that individuals with and without disabilities were (a) negatively affected by ableist language and (b) positively affected by EEO and accommodation statements. Ableist language was associated with lower perceptions of person-organization fit and intentions to apply. In contrast, EEO and accommodation statements were associated with higher intentions to apply. Accommodation statements were also associated with increased fit perceptions. These effects were more pronounced for individuals with disabilities. Study 3 sought to replicate these results while manipulating the desirability of jobs through pay levels. Ableist language continued to have a negative impact on fit and likelihood to apply, and EEO and accommodation statements maintained a positive impact. However, unlike Study 2, these effects were not stronger for those with physical disabilities. This research demonstrates the negative effects of ableist language in recruitment materials and the positive effect of EEO and accommodation statements. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

In recent years, research on workplace envy has expanded beyond its traditional focus on peer-to-peer envy to examine the envy felt by supervisors toward their subordinates (termed as "downward envy"). We contribute to this emerging research stream by examining the emotional and behavioral reactions of employees who are targets of such downward envy, as well as the relational consequences that follow. We tested our model, which is based on the appraisal theory of emotions, across two studies-a multisource, multiphase field study and a vignette-based experimental study-that offer converging evidence in its support. Aligned with our theory, we found that employees appraise downward envy as a relational threat to, or a relational opportunity for, their leader-member exchange relationship, which results in the emotions of relationship anxiety and hope, respectively. These emotions, in turn, elicit contrasting employee behaviors toward the supervisor: anxiety motivates avoidance, while hope encourages approach-oriented citizenship behaviors, which, respectively, have a negative and positive effect on the quality of the leader-member exchange relationship. Furthermore, employees' sense of power with respect to their supervisor was found to mitigate the anxiety-based pathway but played a limited role in influencing the hope-based pathway. Our research advances the nascent literature on downward envy and leader-member exchange instability and also offers practical insights for managing downward envy in organizations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Over the past decades, research on gender bias in leader evaluations has proliferated across multiple disciplines, significantly expanding contexts, outcomes, and theoretical perspectives examined. Despite these valuable contributions, the literature remains fragmented in explaining the persistent variability in how and why gender bias manifests, from severe penalties against women leaders in certain contexts to evaluative advantages in others. To resolve these discrepancies, we shift the focus from leaders to the motivated processes driving observer evaluations. We begin with an integrative review of research, revealing that observers, ranging from supervisors and subordinates to clients and investors, are not conduits of stereotypes but active evaluators whose motives shape how they selectively appraise women leaders. Drawing on motivated cognition theory, we develop a novel motive-driven process model that identifies three core directional motives: identity protection, value alignment, and resource dependence. Using this model, we integrate the literature by highlighting individual-level and contextual antecedents of each motive and explicating how motives drive distinct selective appraisal processes. By unpacking "why" and "how" observers evaluate women leaders through motivated processes, our model also offers targeted interventions that address observer motives rather than changing women's behaviors, underscoring a pressing need to engage various stakeholders in addressing gender bias in leader evaluations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Improving job quality through job transitions is crucial in early adulthood. However, young adults without college degrees, particularly those from lower socioeconomic status (SES) families, can struggle to break out of lower quality jobs. Integrating socioeconomic and psychological perspectives, this research examines how family SES impacts job quality improvement through job search among young adults without college degrees when they transition from one job to another. We develop and test a model that explicates how family SES influences job quality improvement through constraints and resources for job search and self-regulated job search processes. Partnering with a Midwest state government agency, we collected data from young job seekers without college degrees through four longitudinal surveys over 6 months. Our findings revealed that job seekers from lower (vs. higher) SES families faced more basic needs constraints and had fewer college degree holders in their job search networks. These factors, in turn, influenced job seekers' wage increase goals and their job search metacognition. We also found that job seekers with higher wage increase goals achieved larger wage improvement between their previous and new jobs, and those who engaged in more job search metacognition were more likely to secure improvements in benefits, find new jobs with promotion opportunities, and perceive improvements in working conditions. These findings extend the literature on job quality, job search, socioeconomic mobility, and inequality and provide practical implications for multiple stakeholder groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Loss of transportation access is likely to compromise individuals' ability to get to work. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, we triangulate across complementary methodologies to examine the far-reaching impact of driver's license suspension for nonpayment of court-ordered legal fees. Reflexive thematic analysis of preliminary qualitative interview data (N = 21) yielded themes related to compromised social mobility and well-being, with subthemes indicative of job/income loss and un(der)employment resulting from unpaid fines and license suspension, inability to afford additional fees, subsequent transportation challenges, resource acquisition beyond the formal workforce, and a desire for betterment. We build on this qualitative richness via a two-study approach. In Study 1, we draw on quantitative survey data (N = 879), evidencing a positive association between license suspension and unemployment, and indicating that this relationship is mediated by compromised access to transportation. License suspension was also positively associated with turning toward the informal shadow economy for employment, with some individuals reporting turning to sex work and crime to make ends meet. Data bore out a number of employment- and well-being-related consequences of nonpayment policies, and suggested that effects may function differentially by race, with Black individuals experiencing disproportionately negative effects. In Study 2, archival data indicated that enforcement of license suspensions is likely to result in a net loss to state revenue, incentivizing policy revision. Collectively, our data suggest that fine and fee imposition, and associated driver's license suspension, are likely to have a number of negative effects for individuals, employers, and society alike. We offer policy and practice implications related to reevaluating license suspension for nonpayment of court-ordered legal financial obligations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Rivalries motivate competitive performance but can also increase unethical intentions. Although extant theorizing treats this moral-motivational trade-off as inevitable, we show that rivalry's effect on unethical intentions depends on the tenor of the rivalry. Colder competitive relationships (hostile rivalries) exhibit the competitive profile documented in the literature: stronger motivation and increased unethical intentions. But warmer competitive relationships (amicable rivalries) involve a different competitive profile: stronger motivation without increased unethical intentions. Study 1 supported the assumption that participants could identify both amicable and hostile rivalries in their lives. These different rivalries evoked different judgments of warmth, but they did not differ in relationship duration, importance, or competitive domain. Study 2 demonstrated that amicable and hostile rivalries involve higher motivation compared to nonrival competition, but only hostile rivalries provoked stronger unethical intentions. This divergence can be partly explained by individuals' relative focus on the outcome of winning versus the process of competing against hostile (relative to amicable) rivals (Studies 2 and 3). Prompting participants to reflect on the value they derive from the process of competing against their hostile rival significantly reduced unethical intentions (Study 3). These findings encourage more nuanced theorizing about rivalry and identify pathways for organizations to leverage the motivational benefits of rivalry without the ethical trade-offs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).