Suchergebnisse

AbstractWhile past research has found an association between perceived political injustice and diminished trust in institutions, the pathways connecting these constructs remain underexplored. In this study, we proposed a sequential indirect‐effect model, from perceived injustice to feelings of disrespect and ultimately lower trust, via the dual pathways of anger against institutions and constructive patriotism. We tested our model using samples from four countries, namely South Korea, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States (NTotal = 2502). Results revealed a simple indirect effect of injustice via perceived personal respect. Additionally, two sequential indirect pathways emerged via anger and constructive patriotism. Specifically, individuals with higher levels of perceived personal injustice were less likely to trust institutions through decreased perceived personal respect. Moreover, perceived personal respect was associated with reduced trust via increased anger and decreased constructive patriotism. While the results were largely consistent across countries, the significance and relative strength of some of the paths exhibited variability. The findings offer insights into the psychological underpinnings of political trust across contexts. Limitations, implications of the results, and avenues for future research are discussed.

System Justification Theory posits that individuals are less prone to engage in radical action against a system on which they depend. In the present research, we investigated how the association between system‐justifying tendencies and radical intentions is moderated by individuals' orientation towards power differentials, namely their "power distance." A stronger power distance orientation implies that individuals perceive power differentials as a fixed feature of society, curtailing prospects for change. We hypothesized that, at lower levels of power distance orientation, system‐justification tendencies would be associated with reduced radical intentions. We contend this will occur because individuals feel dependent on a system perceived as malleable (dependency hypothesis). Conversely, at higher levels of power distance orientation, we expected system‐justification tendencies to be associated with stronger radical intentions. We argue that this effect reflects the rejection of dependency on a system perceived as fixed (counterdependency hypothesis). This dependency‐counterdependency dynamic was tested using a multigroup latent structural equation model and samples from four countries (NTotal = 2,502), South Korea, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Results were consistent with the hypothesized dynamic across all countries. Theoretical implications of the findings, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.

PurposeAntecedents and outcomes of workplace deviance have been studied over the past few decades but there is still a lack of research from an organizational climate, witness and cultural point of view. Theoretical considerations for the present research are based on the social cognitive theory perspective where the authors expect employees's involvement in workplace destructive deviance would depend on their organizational climate perception, witness behavior and cultural orientation.Design/methodology/approachA total of 987 participants from India (N = 404) and USA (N = 583) completed an online questionnaire, and multi-group structural equation modeling analysis was conducted to test the hypothesized model.FindingsAcross cultural groups, higher collectivism is associated with lower engagement in workplace deviance. Furthermore, employees' higher intervening witness behavior is associated with lower destructive deviant behaviors when employees showed higher endorsement of collectivism in India (not USA). However, employees' higher self-serving witness behavior is associated with higher destructive deviant behaviors. Interestingly, employees with higher endorsement of individualism associated with organizational climate are more likely to engage in destructive deviance.Originality/valueThe main originality of this study is to further increase the understanding of the relationship between organizational climate, witness behavior (self-serving and intervening behavior) and workplace deviance (organizational and interpersonal destructive deviance) considering the role of employees' cultural orientation (individualism vs collectivism).

PurposeWorkplace incivility is a common deviant behavior happening in organizational contexts, and it can have serious negative consequences such as decreasing employees' organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and increasing their turnover intentions. This study aims to test the argument that emotional exhaustion and acceptability of workplace incivility can act as mediators in this relationship between incivility and OCB and turnover intentions. Moreover, the assumption that employees' political skill can act as a buffer on job strain caused by incivility displayed by both coworkers and supervisors was tested.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 703 South Korean employees recruited online completed a self-assessment on their political skill first and then they were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions: either recalled a co-worker or a supervisor who had previously displayed uncivil behaviors toward them.FindingsThe stronger the employees' experience of incivility, the lower their OCB-O and the higher their turnover intentions. These relationships were mediated by acceptability of incivility and emotional exhaustions. Interestingly, results also supported the moderating role of political skill on the relationship between incivility and turnover intentions mediated by acceptability, with higher politically skilled employees being more likely to accept incivility when compared to lower politically skilled employees.Originality/valueUsing a between-subjects design, the findings expand the current knowledge regarding the negative impacts of workplace incivility. Specifically, they showed that acceptability is an important mechanism to understand the impact of workplace incivility on OCB and turnover intention.

Purpose: Workplace incivility is a common deviant behavior happening in organizational contexts, and it can have serious negative consequences such as decreasing employees' organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and increasing their turnover intentions. This study aims to test the argument that emotional exhaustion and acceptability of workplace incivility can act as mediators in this relationship between incivility and OCB and turnover intentions. Moreover, the assumption that employees' political skill can act as a buffer on job strain caused by incivility displayed by both coworkers and supervisors was tested. Design/methodology/approach: In total, 703 South Korean employees recruited online completed a self-assessment on their political skill first and then they were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions: either recalled a co-worker or a supervisor who had previously displayed uncivil behaviors toward them. Findings: The stronger the employees' experience of incivility, the lower their OCB-O and the higher their turnover intentions. These relationships were mediated by acceptability of incivility and emotional exhaustions. Interestingly, results also supported the moderating role of political skill on the relationship between incivility and turnover intentions mediated by acceptability, with higher politically skilled employees being more likely to accept incivility when compared to lower politically skilled employees. Originality/value: Using a between-subjects design, the findings expand the current knowledge regarding the negative impacts of workplace incivility. Specifically, they showed that acceptability is an important mechanism to understand the impact of workplace incivility on OCB and turnover intention. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion

The coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented health crisis. Many governments around the world have responded by implementing lockdown measures of various degrees of intensity. To be effective, these measures must rely on citizens' cooperation. In the present study, we drew samples from the United States (N = 597), Italy (N = 606), and South Korea (N = 693) and examined predictors of compliance with social distancing and intentions to report the infection to both authorities and acquaintances. Data were collected between April 6th and 8th 2020. We investigated the role of cultural orientations of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism, self-conscious emotions of shame and guilt related to the infection and trust in the government's action. Across all countries, vertical collectivism (VC) predicted stronger shame, whereas horizontal collectivism predicted stronger trust in the government. Only in the United States, VC was associated with stronger trust. Stronger feelings of shame predicted lower compliance and intentions to report the infection to both authorities and acquaintances. In contrast, guilt was associated with stronger intentions to report the infection to the authorities. Finally, trust was associated with stronger compliance and intentions to report the infection to the authorities. Unlike Italy and South Korea, the association between trust on compliance was not statistically significant in the United States, implications of the findings, and directions for future research are discussed.

The coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented health crisis. Many governments around the world have responded by implementing lockdown measures of various degrees of intensity. To be effective, these measures must rely on citizens' cooperation. In the present study, we drew samples from the United States (N = 597), Italy (N = 606) and South Korea (N = 693) and examined predictors of compliance with social distancing and intentions to report the infection to both authorities and acquaintances. Data were collected between April 6th and 8th 2020. We investigated the role of cultural orientations of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism, self-conscious emotions of shame and guilt related to the infection and trust in the government's action. Across all countries, vertical collectivism predicted stronger shame, whereas horizontal collectivism predicted stronger trust in the government. Only in the United States, vertical collectivism was associated with stronger trust. Stronger feelings of shame predicted lower compliance and intentions to report the infection to both authorities and acquaintances. In contrast, guilt was associated with stronger intentions to report the infection to the authorities. Finally, trust was associated with stronger compliance and intentions to report the infection to the authorities. Unlike Italy and South Korea, the association between trust on compliance was not statistically significant in the United States, Implications of the findings, and directions for future research are discussed.

The cultural dimension of power distance refers to individuals' acceptance of power inequalities in society. Countries characterized by high power distance at the collective level face more domestic extremism. However, research has yet to examine how individual differences in power distance orientation may affect individuals' intentions to engage in radical and violent political action. In this research, we test the hypothesis that stronger endorsement of power distance values makes people more prone to express the intentions to engage in radical and violent political action. To test the hypothesis' generalizability across contexts, we sample from two countries characterized by different levels of power distance at the collective level, South Korea (higher power distance) and the United States (lower power distance). Studies 1a and 1b were surveys (Ntot = 1,214) demonstrating an association between power distance orientation and radical political action over and beyond other known predictors of political participation, including political efficacy, perceived justice, emotions of anger and contempt, political orientation, and social dominance orientation. In Studies 2a-2c (Ntot = 430; 2c preregistered), priming a higher (vs lower) power distance orientation heightened individuals' propensity to express the intentions to engage in radical political action. Theoretical implications of the findings, and future research directions, are discussed.

Purpose
Antecedents and influences of workplace incivility have recently been studied in many areas of research but there is still a lack of consideration for the impact of culture. Theoretical considerations for the present research are based on the cultural dimensions of power distance and tightness/looseness because the collective levels of power distance are similar between Korea and Spain, but the collective levels of tightness/looseness are different between the two countries. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether individuals' occupational position affects their normative reactions to incivility differently.


Design/methodology/approach
Participant (victim)'s (those who react to uncivil behaviors) social power (low vs high) and perpetrator's (those who exhibit uncivil behaviors) social power (low vs high) were experimentally manipulated; all participants were randomly assigned to one of four perpetrator × victim conditions in relation to hierarchical positions (Ntot = 467).


Findings
The results suggest that the level of social and personal acceptability was greater either among Koreans than Spanish at a collective level or among people who endorsed higher power distance and tightness values. All in all, the findings highlight cultural influences on the importance of social hierarchy as a factor that can impact the people's normative reactions to incivility.


Originality/value
The findings broaden our understanding of the psychology of employees in relation to incivility, by simultaneously considering the influences of culture (power distance and tightness/looseness) and social power.

PurposeThis study aims to examine the role of deviant status (lower vs higher rank) and organizational structure (vertical vs horizontal) on individuals' responses to workplace deviance.Design/methodology/approachTwo studies (N= 472) were designed to examine the role of deviant status and organizational structure in responses to workplace deviance. Study 1 (N= 272) manipulated deviant status and organizational structure. Study 2 (N= 200) also manipulated deviant status but focused on participants' subjective evaluations of the organizational structure of their workplace.FindingsStudy 1 found that participants reported lower job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and higher turnover intentions when they imagined being confronted with deviant behaviors displayed by a manager (vs by a subordinate), regardless of the type of organizational structure. Study 2 extended this finding by showing that the indirect effect of organizational structure (vertical vs horizontal) on turnover intention via job satisfaction and organizational commitment was moderated by deviant status: when the deviant's status was higher, working in a vertical (vs horizontal) organization was associated with decreased job satisfaction and commitment, which, in turn, was associated with a higher level of turnover intentions.Originality/valueThe findings broaden our understanding of how individuals respond to deviance at the workplace, by simultaneously considering the effects of organizational structure (vertical vs horizontal) and deviant status (upward vs downward directions of deviance).