Journal of Applied Psychology最新文献

Although subordinate-to-supervisor relational identification (RI) has gained significant scholarly attention in organizational research, an understanding of its nomological network is incomplete. There have also been recurring discussions about its distinctions with another more extensively researched relational construct-leader-member exchange (LMX). In this meta-analysis, we expand Sluss and Ashforth's (2007) typology, going beyond the influence of the supervisor, to systematically study the antecedents and consequences of RI and its comparison with LMX. Meta-analytic results based on 157 independent samples demonstrate that positive leader behaviors that span role-based and person-based identities (e.g., transformational leadership, supervisor humility) are important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI, with effects contingent on subordinates' national culture (i.e., collectivism and power distance). Although less hypothesized, relational and organizational contexts as well as subordinate characteristics are also important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI. The results further show that RI relates to important subordinate behaviors and attitudes. Finally, we test how RI and LMX have differing effects across these important subordinate attitudes and behaviors. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of RI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Research and the media demonstrate the profound impact hostile work environments have on organizations and their members. Often, the term "toxic work climate" is used to describe patterns of aggressive behaviors that harm individuals and manifest in the broader workplace. However, despite these common references, scholars still know relatively little about what a toxic work climate actually entails, the processes by which they emerge, and their influence on organizational outcomes. The research domain is complex. Within the organizational literature alone, toxic work climates have been described as those that harbor abusive bosses, aggressive employees, and those that show signs of bullying or incivility. Our aim in this integrative conceptual review is to add precision and focus to this multidisciplinary and fragmented literature. Grounding our efforts in multilevel theories, we first introduce an overarching definition of the toxic work climate construct and review research on existing hostile climate types that can appropriately be consolidated under this new heading. We then develop a new theoretical model that outlines the dominant causes and mechanisms by which toxic work climates form, and the main pathways by which they influence employees, teams, and organizations. Finally, we provide a unified path forward for advancing theory, research, and practice, including advice on how toxic climates might be combated in years to come. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

A large body of literature has studied the effect of stereotype threat and stereotype lift on cognitive test performance. Research on stereotype threat (ST) examines whether the awareness of a negative stereotype can decrease stereotyped group members' test performance. A less commonly studied influence of stereotypes is stereotype lift (SL), defined as an increase in a group's test performance due to not being part of a negative stereotype. For example, men might perform better on math tests if they are primed on the stereotype that men are better than women at math. Walton and Cohen (2003) previously meta-analyzed the impact of SL on cognitive tests, finding an overall d = 0.24. We report an updated meta-analysis on SL with more samples and moderator analyses. We then meta-analyzed between-group effects (majority-minority group differences both in the presence and absence of SL and ST) to compare their relative contributions to subgroup mean differences on cognitive tests. Our results indicate that SL has a small influence on cognitive test performance (d = 0.09, SD_res = 0.19), and that subgroup mean differences result largely from between-group effects rather than from the effects of ST and SL. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Extant research demonstrates the destructive nature of authoritarian leadership in the workplace, yet its widespread use suggests that a more balanced view of this leadership style may be needed to identify whether this form of leadership engenders favorable reactions in specific circumstances. Integrating insights from appraisal theory and the compensatory control model, we posit that authoritarian leadership can evoke anxiety among employees in less disruptive settings, whereas it evokes feelings of awe in highly disruptive contexts. These anxiety and awe reactions then influence employees' downstream leader-focused behaviors (i.e., leader-directed avoidance and affiliation) and general work behaviors (i.e., counterproductive behavior and job performance). Thus, whether reactions to authoritarian leadership are dysfunctional or functional is contingent on event disruption as a key boundary condition. Results from an experience sampling study (Study 1), a multiwave and multisource field study (Study 2), and laboratory experiments (Studies 3a and 3b) largely confirm these predictions. The findings underscore the importance of event disruption for predicting employee reactions to authoritarian styles of leadership. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Moral stigma attached to an occupation can scar workers through discrediting, shaming, and denying respect. It can also open the door to interpersonal mistreatment, but little is known about how morally stigmatized workers navigate anticipated disrespect to potentially avoid harm. We explore this issue in a study of an occupation carrying severe moral stigma and where disrespect and workplace mistreatment are pervasive: models in hip-hop and rap music videos. Through analyses of 71 interviews with 48 video models and 19 industry informants, field observations, and archival data, we show how severe moral stigma and industry constraints promote generalized disrespect of video models (i.e., denial of worth to all role occupants) and, thus, each model's personal vulnerability to mistreatment. Two distinct groups of models emerged from our analysis-those who viewed themselves as emboldened in their role identity and those who did not-and this emboldened role identity was associated with differing perceptions of their personal vulnerability to mistreatment and their behaviors to mitigate it. The first group of models, those reporting an emboldened role identity, perceived their vulnerability to mistreatment as controllable. They strategically used both assertive behaviors (that earned respect from others) and passive behaviors (that avoided disrespect from others) to mitigate mistreatment. By contrast, the second group perceived their vulnerability to mistreatment as uncontrollable and reported using only passive behaviors (to avoid disrespect) when mistreatment was imminent. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of our findings, advancing knowledge of dirty work, workplace mistreatment, respect dynamics, and identity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).