以独特的方式融入工作组:感知到的个人-群体契合特征的潜在剖面分析。

IF 9.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-07 DOI:10.1037/apl0001162
Qi Zhang, Christina S Li, Daniel D Goering, Amy L Kristof-Brown
{"title":"以独特的方式融入工作组:感知到的个人-群体契合特征的潜在剖面分析。","authors":"Qi Zhang, Christina S Li, Daniel D Goering, Amy L Kristof-Brown","doi":"10.1037/apl0001162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research has identified seven characteristics-value congruence, shared interests, perceived demographic similarity, needs-supplies match, goal similarity, common workstyle, and complementary attributes-on which group members simultaneously evaluate their perceived person-group (PG) fit. Most of extant research has focused on how each characteristic or them as a composite predicts outcomes. However, these variable-centered approaches fail to address how there may be subpopulations of members who differentially combine the PG fit characteristics and how such conjunctive effects differentially relate to various work outcomes. To address these issues, we adopt a profile-based approach using latent profile analysis to understand how group members are similar to and different from each other on more holistic configurations of perceived PG fit experiences. With two widely different samples of employees working in group settings, we found seven unique profiles of PG fit: perfect fits, comfortable fits, surface-level misfits, out of syncs, social misfits, lone wolves, and total misfits. We also found in Sample 2 that these profiles differentially predicted group member outcomes commonly studied in the PG fit literature, including attitudes (satisfaction and cohesion), performance behaviors (task performance and citizenship behaviors of helping and voice), and withdrawal (social loafing and turnover). Complementing research that used variable-centered approaches, our profile-based results reveal new theoretical and practical insights of perceived PG fit, suggesting that different group members have distinct configurations of PG fit, and that higher levels of PG fit are not universally positive, and neither is every type of misfit universally negative. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"779-794"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fitting in a workgroup in unique ways: A latent profile analysis of perceived person-group fit characteristics.\",\"authors\":\"Qi Zhang, Christina S Li, Daniel D Goering, Amy L Kristof-Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/apl0001162\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Research has identified seven characteristics-value congruence, shared interests, perceived demographic similarity, needs-supplies match, goal similarity, common workstyle, and complementary attributes-on which group members simultaneously evaluate their perceived person-group (PG) fit. Most of extant research has focused on how each characteristic or them as a composite predicts outcomes. However, these variable-centered approaches fail to address how there may be subpopulations of members who differentially combine the PG fit characteristics and how such conjunctive effects differentially relate to various work outcomes. To address these issues, we adopt a profile-based approach using latent profile analysis to understand how group members are similar to and different from each other on more holistic configurations of perceived PG fit experiences. With two widely different samples of employees working in group settings, we found seven unique profiles of PG fit: perfect fits, comfortable fits, surface-level misfits, out of syncs, social misfits, lone wolves, and total misfits. We also found in Sample 2 that these profiles differentially predicted group member outcomes commonly studied in the PG fit literature, including attitudes (satisfaction and cohesion), performance behaviors (task performance and citizenship behaviors of helping and voice), and withdrawal (social loafing and turnover). Complementing research that used variable-centered approaches, our profile-based results reveal new theoretical and practical insights of perceived PG fit, suggesting that different group members have distinct configurations of PG fit, and that higher levels of PG fit are not universally positive, and neither is every type of misfit universally negative. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15135,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"779-794\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001162\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001162","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究已经确定了七个特征——价值一致性、共同兴趣、感知人口统计学相似性、需求-供给匹配、目标相似性、共同工作方式和互补属性——这些特征是群体成员同时评估他们感知的个人-群体(PG)契合度的依据。现有的大多数研究都集中在每个特征或它们作为一个组合如何预测结果。然而,这些以变量为中心的方法未能解决可能存在的成员亚群如何以不同的方式组合PG适合特征,以及这种组合效应如何以不同的方式与各种工作结果相关。为了解决这些问题,我们采用了一种基于个人资料的方法,使用潜在个人资料分析来了解群体成员在感知PG契合体验的更全面配置上是如何相似和不同的。通过对在团队环境中工作的两个截然不同的员工样本进行研究,我们发现了PG契合度的七种独特特征:完美契合度、舒适契合度、表面不契合度、不同步度、社交不契合度、孤狼型和完全不契合度。在样本2中,我们还发现这些特征在预测PG匹配文献中常见的群体成员结果方面存在差异,包括态度(满意度和凝聚力)、绩效行为(任务绩效和帮助和声音的公民行为)和退缩(社会懒散和离职)。作为对使用变量中心方法的研究的补充,我们基于个人资料的研究结果揭示了关于感知PG适合度的新的理论和实践见解,表明不同的群体成员具有不同的PG适合度配置,较高水平的PG适合度并不总是积极的,也不是所有类型的不适合度都是消极的。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fitting in a workgroup in unique ways: A latent profile analysis of perceived person-group fit characteristics.

Research has identified seven characteristics-value congruence, shared interests, perceived demographic similarity, needs-supplies match, goal similarity, common workstyle, and complementary attributes-on which group members simultaneously evaluate their perceived person-group (PG) fit. Most of extant research has focused on how each characteristic or them as a composite predicts outcomes. However, these variable-centered approaches fail to address how there may be subpopulations of members who differentially combine the PG fit characteristics and how such conjunctive effects differentially relate to various work outcomes. To address these issues, we adopt a profile-based approach using latent profile analysis to understand how group members are similar to and different from each other on more holistic configurations of perceived PG fit experiences. With two widely different samples of employees working in group settings, we found seven unique profiles of PG fit: perfect fits, comfortable fits, surface-level misfits, out of syncs, social misfits, lone wolves, and total misfits. We also found in Sample 2 that these profiles differentially predicted group member outcomes commonly studied in the PG fit literature, including attitudes (satisfaction and cohesion), performance behaviors (task performance and citizenship behaviors of helping and voice), and withdrawal (social loafing and turnover). Complementing research that used variable-centered approaches, our profile-based results reveal new theoretical and practical insights of perceived PG fit, suggesting that different group members have distinct configurations of PG fit, and that higher levels of PG fit are not universally positive, and neither is every type of misfit universally negative. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
期刊最新文献
Prospects for reducing group mean differences on cognitive tests via item selection strategies. Self-promotion in entrepreneurship: A driver for proactive adaptation. Coping with work-nonwork stressors over time: A person-centered, multistudy integration of coping breadth and depth. A person-centered approach to behaving badly at work: An examination of workplace deviance patterns. How perceived lack of benevolence harms trust of artificial intelligence management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1