Pub Date : 2023-11-21DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-081722-053704
Franco Fraccaroli, Sara Zaniboni, Donald M. Truxillo
Models of work design emerged in the twentieth century to address workplace changes created by the industrial revolution. However, the world of work is currently undergoing a new, profound revolution in terms of technological, demographic, and environmental changes, leading to a new economy, within which organizations and employees must function. The field of work design currently includes robust theories with a deep understanding of how work design affects employee outcomes, many with relevance to this new economy. However, the new economy also includes issues never before considered (e.g., algorithmic management and gig and lone work), and the field of work design must tackle the implications of these emerging issues. In this article, we review the general findings on work design and then examine a range of contextual, economic, technological, and diversity issues and their relevance to work design. We conclude with an agenda for future work design research and implications for work analysis and work design interventions and policies.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Challenges in the New Economy: A New Era for Work Design","authors":"Franco Fraccaroli, Sara Zaniboni, Donald M. Truxillo","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-081722-053704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-081722-053704","url":null,"abstract":"Models of work design emerged in the twentieth century to address workplace changes created by the industrial revolution. However, the world of work is currently undergoing a new, profound revolution in terms of technological, demographic, and environmental changes, leading to a new economy, within which organizations and employees must function. The field of work design currently includes robust theories with a deep understanding of how work design affects employee outcomes, many with relevance to this new economy. However, the new economy also includes issues never before considered (e.g., algorithmic management and gig and lone work), and the field of work design must tackle the implications of these emerging issues. In this article, we review the general findings on work design and then examine a range of contextual, economic, technological, and diversity issues and their relevance to work design. We conclude with an agenda for future work design research and implications for work analysis and work design interventions and policies.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":"24 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138293931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-14DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-045646
Sang Eun Woo, Joeri Hofmans, Bart Wille, Louis Tay
The goal of person-centered methods is to identify subpopulations of individuals based on within-group similarity of data relative to between-group variability. In this article, we provide an overview of specific person-centered methods, thus shifting the attention from studying relations between variables to studying relations between people or entities of interest. Next, we present a selective and critical review of recent research utilizing person-centered modeling approaches, highlighting key trends in the organizational psychology and organizational behavior literature from both the methodological and the conceptual perspectives. Lastly, we conclude with reflections and recommendations, highlighting several areas that need careful consideration when conducting person-centered research.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Person-Centered Modeling: Techniques for Studying Associations Between People Rather than Variables","authors":"Sang Eun Woo, Joeri Hofmans, Bart Wille, Louis Tay","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-045646","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-045646","url":null,"abstract":"The goal of person-centered methods is to identify subpopulations of individuals based on within-group similarity of data relative to between-group variability. In this article, we provide an overview of specific person-centered methods, thus shifting the attention from studying relations between variables to studying relations between people or entities of interest. Next, we present a selective and critical review of recent research utilizing person-centered modeling approaches, highlighting key trends in the organizational psychology and organizational behavior literature from both the methodological and the conceptual perspectives. Lastly, we conclude with reflections and recommendations, highlighting several areas that need careful consideration when conducting person-centered research.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"109126986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-14DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-022320
Brian S. Connelly, Samuel T. McAbee
Reputations are immensely consequential for both people and organizations. Yet research on reputations in the workplace is fragmented across a number of literatures. In this article, we first review conceptual and definitional issues surrounding the study of reputations in the workplace. We then summarize several theoretical frameworks for studying reputations drawing from the literature on accuracy and errors in person perception, surveying the Realistic Accuracy Model, Self-Other Knowledge Asymmetry model, impression management, socioanalytic theory, social cognition, stereotypes, gossip, and culture. We present the Trait-Reputation-Identity model as a framework for integrating these disparate literatures. Next, we discuss broad areas where workplace reputations may impact individual and organizational outcomes including job performance, career success, and well-being. We conclude by offering a number of observations regarding the state of the literature on reputations and prospects for contributing to organizational psychology and organizational behavior.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Reputations at Work: Origins and Outcomes of Shared Person Perceptions","authors":"Brian S. Connelly, Samuel T. McAbee","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-022320","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-022320","url":null,"abstract":"Reputations are immensely consequential for both people and organizations. Yet research on reputations in the workplace is fragmented across a number of literatures. In this article, we first review conceptual and definitional issues surrounding the study of reputations in the workplace. We then summarize several theoretical frameworks for studying reputations drawing from the literature on accuracy and errors in person perception, surveying the Realistic Accuracy Model, Self-Other Knowledge Asymmetry model, impression management, socioanalytic theory, social cognition, stereotypes, gossip, and culture. We present the Trait-Reputation-Identity model as a framework for integrating these disparate literatures. Next, we discuss broad areas where workplace reputations may impact individual and organizational outcomes including job performance, career success, and well-being. We conclude by offering a number of observations regarding the state of the literature on reputations and prospects for contributing to organizational psychology and organizational behavior.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":"23 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"109126987","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-14DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-101022-101333
John D. Kammeyer-Mueller, Alex L. Rubenstein, Tianna S. Barnes
The relationship between work attitudes such as satisfaction and commitment and behaviors such as task effort, citizenship behavior, absenteeism, job search, and turnover is a perennial focus of organizational research. Over time we have learned a great deal about why, how, and when attitudes predict work behavior, but new questions and theories continue to proliferate. With this review, we aim to synthesize existing organizational literature on attitudes and behavior, focusing on how the field can be organized using principles from Ajzen & Kruglanski's (2019) theory of reasoned goal pursuit. The accumulated evidence answers longstanding questions while simultaneously raising new ones related to the link between general attitudes and specific behavior; the proximal effect of intentions; the role of goals, social contexts, and behavioral control; and the dynamic processes among attitudes, environments, and behavior. We also suggest applications of our organizing framework to enhance future work attitudes and behavior research.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"The Role of Attitudes in Work Behavior","authors":"John D. Kammeyer-Mueller, Alex L. Rubenstein, Tianna S. Barnes","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-101022-101333","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-101022-101333","url":null,"abstract":"The relationship between work attitudes such as satisfaction and commitment and behaviors such as task effort, citizenship behavior, absenteeism, job search, and turnover is a perennial focus of organizational research. Over time we have learned a great deal about why, how, and when attitudes predict work behavior, but new questions and theories continue to proliferate. With this review, we aim to synthesize existing organizational literature on attitudes and behavior, focusing on how the field can be organized using principles from Ajzen & Kruglanski's (2019) theory of reasoned goal pursuit. The accumulated evidence answers longstanding questions while simultaneously raising new ones related to the link between general attitudes and specific behavior; the proximal effect of intentions; the role of goals, social contexts, and behavioral control; and the dynamic processes among attitudes, environments, and behavior. We also suggest applications of our organizing framework to enhance future work attitudes and behavior research.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":"23 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"109126988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-14DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040430
William L. Gardner, Andrew A. Hanna, Farzaneh Noghani, Claudia C. Cogliser
Leadership emergence is an inherently dynamic process whereby certain individuals come to be seen as leaders by others, some of whom will choose to follow them. The circumstances under which leadership emergence occurs depend on the persons involved, their interactions, and the context. Yet leadership research has too often viewed leadership emergence from a static and entity perspective, where some individuals are assumed to have qualities that predispose them to lead, without explaining how and why emergence occurs. Alternatively, we apply a typology that examines leadership emergence across levels of analysis (event, individual, dyadic, team, and organizational) and forms of emergence (global, compositional, and compilational). We examine representative theories of leadership emergence at the intersections of these considerations to demonstrate the utility of adopting a multilevel and dynamic perspective. Additionally, we offer recommendations for applying this typology to advance future theory and research into leadership emergence.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Leadership Emergence: Answering the “How” and “Why” Questions by Considering Levels of Analysis and Form of Emergence","authors":"William L. Gardner, Andrew A. Hanna, Farzaneh Noghani, Claudia C. Cogliser","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040430","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040430","url":null,"abstract":"Leadership emergence is an inherently dynamic process whereby certain individuals come to be seen as leaders by others, some of whom will choose to follow them. The circumstances under which leadership emergence occurs depend on the persons involved, their interactions, and the context. Yet leadership research has too often viewed leadership emergence from a static and entity perspective, where some individuals are assumed to have qualities that predispose them to lead, without explaining how and why emergence occurs. Alternatively, we apply a typology that examines leadership emergence across levels of analysis (event, individual, dyadic, team, and organizational) and forms of emergence (global, compositional, and compilational). We examine representative theories of leadership emergence at the intersections of these considerations to demonstrate the utility of adopting a multilevel and dynamic perspective. Additionally, we offer recommendations for applying this typology to advance future theory and research into leadership emergence.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":"24 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"109126984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-14DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111821-033012
Robert H. Moorman, Brian D. Lyons, Brittany K. Mercado, Anthony C. Klotz
The emergence of gig work (e.g., freelancing, rideshare driving, food and parcel delivery, travel nursing, virtual assistantship) and the gig economy challenges organizational researchers to consider how they should revise traditional theories of work behavior to consider the dynamics of new work arrangements. As a prime example that is central to this review, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is a form of job performance whereby motives stem from the quality of work relationships with direct supervisors, coworkers, and other organizational agents. However, gig workers experience very different work relationships and may perform OCB for different reasons (if at all). In this review, we address the question of how OCB theory should evolve to be relevant to gig workers. We summarize traditional motives for OCB performance and review current research describing and classifying gig work. We conclude by ( a) identifying gig worker citizenship (GWC) as a form of citizenship behavior that better fits the reality of gig work and ( b) offering a revised model of how OCB motives may help predict GWC performance.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Driving the Extra Mile in the Gig Economy: The Motivational Foundations of Gig Worker Citizenship","authors":"Robert H. Moorman, Brian D. Lyons, Brittany K. Mercado, Anthony C. Klotz","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111821-033012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111821-033012","url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of gig work (e.g., freelancing, rideshare driving, food and parcel delivery, travel nursing, virtual assistantship) and the gig economy challenges organizational researchers to consider how they should revise traditional theories of work behavior to consider the dynamics of new work arrangements. As a prime example that is central to this review, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is a form of job performance whereby motives stem from the quality of work relationships with direct supervisors, coworkers, and other organizational agents. However, gig workers experience very different work relationships and may perform OCB for different reasons (if at all). In this review, we address the question of how OCB theory should evolve to be relevant to gig workers. We summarize traditional motives for OCB performance and review current research describing and classifying gig work. We conclude by ( a) identifying gig worker citizenship (GWC) as a form of citizenship behavior that better fits the reality of gig work and ( b) offering a revised model of how OCB motives may help predict GWC performance.Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 11 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":"24 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"109126985","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-23DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-050708
Scott Highhouse, Margaret E. Brooks
Some assert that noise (i.e., unwanted variance) is the most neglected yet most important source of error in judgment. We suggest that this problem was discovered nearly 100 years ago in the area of personnel selection and that a century of selection research has shown that noise can be demonstrably reduced by structuring the process (i.e., decomposing the component parts, agreeing on standards, and applying those standards consistently) and by aggregating judgments independently. Algorithms can aid significantly in this process but are often confused with methods that, in their current form, can substantially increase noise in judgment (e.g., artificial intelligence and machine learning).
{"title":"Improving Workplace Judgments by Reducing Noise: Lessons Learned from a Century of Selection Research","authors":"Scott Highhouse, Margaret E. Brooks","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-050708","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-050708","url":null,"abstract":"Some assert that noise (i.e., unwanted variance) is the most neglected yet most important source of error in judgment. We suggest that this problem was discovered nearly 100 years ago in the area of personnel selection and that a century of selection research has shown that noise can be demonstrably reduced by structuring the process (i.e., decomposing the component parts, agreeing on standards, and applying those standards consistently) and by aggregating judgments independently. Algorithms can aid significantly in this process but are often confused with methods that, in their current form, can substantially increase noise in judgment (e.g., artificial intelligence and machine learning).","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42890432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-23DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-080422-052147
Nathan P. Podsakoff, Kristen J. Freiburger, P. M. Podsakoff, Christopher C. Rosen
Although traditional views of workplace stress assume that all job demands have deleterious consequences, research indicates that some job demands may benefit employees. Notably, the Challenge–Hindrance Stressor Framework (CHSF) proposes that, although job demands that constrain, hinder, or thwart personal growth and achievement (hindrance stressors) have negative effects on work-related outcomes, job demands that provide the potential for personal growth and achievement (challenge stressors) have positive effects on these outcomes. Despite the attention generated by the CHSF, several criticisms and limitations hinder the potential of this framework. Thus, this article reviews our current understanding of the CHSF, addresses important criticisms about the nature and effects of challenge and hindrance stressors, and discusses how future research should approach conceptual and methodological challenges to lay the foundation for the next iteration of this framework—CHSF 2.0. Building on this new framework, we discuss some implications for cross-cultural research and for practitioners.
{"title":"Laying the Foundation for the Challenge–Hindrance Stressor Framework 2.0","authors":"Nathan P. Podsakoff, Kristen J. Freiburger, P. M. Podsakoff, Christopher C. Rosen","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-080422-052147","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-080422-052147","url":null,"abstract":"Although traditional views of workplace stress assume that all job demands have deleterious consequences, research indicates that some job demands may benefit employees. Notably, the Challenge–Hindrance Stressor Framework (CHSF) proposes that, although job demands that constrain, hinder, or thwart personal growth and achievement (hindrance stressors) have negative effects on work-related outcomes, job demands that provide the potential for personal growth and achievement (challenge stressors) have positive effects on these outcomes. Despite the attention generated by the CHSF, several criticisms and limitations hinder the potential of this framework. Thus, this article reviews our current understanding of the CHSF, addresses important criticisms about the nature and effects of challenge and hindrance stressors, and discusses how future research should approach conceptual and methodological challenges to lay the foundation for the next iteration of this framework—CHSF 2.0. Building on this new framework, we discuss some implications for cross-cultural research and for practitioners.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42702792","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-23DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031921-021922
S. Morris
Meta-analysis provides a powerful tool for integrating findings from the research literature and building statistical models to explore trends and inconsistencies in the research base. Meta-analysis starts with a process for translating results from each study into an effect size that represents all findings in a common metric. Statistical models are then applied to estimate the mean, variance, and moderators of effect size. This article explores several key decision points in conducting a meta-analysis, including issues in obtaining a common metric, accounting for psychometric artifacts, and choosing an appropriate statistical model. It provides recommendations for choosing among alternate approaches and reporting results to ensure transparency.
{"title":"Meta-Analysis in Organizational Research: A Guide to Methodological Options","authors":"S. Morris","doi":"10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031921-021922","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031921-021922","url":null,"abstract":"Meta-analysis provides a powerful tool for integrating findings from the research literature and building statistical models to explore trends and inconsistencies in the research base. Meta-analysis starts with a process for translating results from each study into an effect size that represents all findings in a common metric. Statistical models are then applied to estimate the mean, variance, and moderators of effect size. This article explores several key decision points in conducting a meta-analysis, including issues in obtaining a common metric, accounting for psychometric artifacts, and choosing an appropriate statistical model. It provides recommendations for choosing among alternate approaches and reporting results to ensure transparency.","PeriodicalId":48019,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.7,"publicationDate":"2023-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45165931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：