A meta-analysis of experienced incivility and its correlates: Exploring the dual path model of experienced workplace incivility.

The present study proposes and examines a theoretical Dual Path Model of Experienced Workplace Incivility using meta-analytic relationships (k = 246; N = 145, 008) between experienced incivility and frequent correlates. The stress-induced mechanism was supported with perceived stress mediating the meta-analytical relationship between experienced incivility and occupational health (i.e., emotional exhaustion and somatic complaints). The commitment-induced mechanism was also supported with affective commitment to the organization mediating the relationship between experienced incivility and organizational correlates (i.e., job satisfaction and turnover intentions). However, these paths were not able to explain the strong relationship between experienced and enacted workplace incivility. Moderating analysis revealed that the experienced-enactment link is stronger between coworkers, in comparison to incivility experienced from supervisors; experienced incivility is more strongly related to organizational correlates, when incivility is enacted by supervisors in comparison to coworkers, and in human service samples when compared to samples comprised of mixed occupations. We discuss theoretical and practical implications as well as directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Measuring delay discounting in a crowdsourced sample: An exploratory study.

Delay discounting is a measure of preferences for smaller immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards. Discounting has been assessed in many ways; these methods have variably and inconsistently involved measures of different lengths (single vs. multiple items), forced-choice methods, self-report methods, online and laboratory assessments, monetary and non-monetary compensation. The majority of these studies have been conducted in laboratory settings. However, over the past 20 years, behavioral data collection has increasingly shifted online. Usually, these experiments involve completing short tasks for small amounts of money, and are thus qualitatively different than experiments in the lab, which are typically more involved and in a strongly controlled environment. The present study aimed to determine how to best measure future discounting in a crowdsourced sample using three discounting measures (a single shot measure, the 27-item Kirby Monetary Choice Questionnaire, and a one-time Matching Task). We examined associations of these measures with theoretically related variables, and assessed influence of payment on responding. Results indicated that correlations between the discounting tasks and conceptually related measures were smaller than in prior laboratory experiments. Moreover, our results suggest providing monetary compensation may attenuate correlations between discounting measures and related variables. These findings suggest that incentivizing discounting measures changes the nature of measurement in these tasks.