Doxing, political affiliation, and type of information: Effects on suspicion, perceived similarity, and hiring-related judgments.

Researchers have begun to focus on the influence of political affiliation in organizations. In this context, we investigated how doxing (i.e., using social media to post information online with malintent) influences hiring-related decisions. Based on the integration of a political affiliation and state suspicion model, we investigated how a dox containing different types of information (affirming a political party affiliation vs. providing derogatory/negative information about an opposing party) and political party affiliation similarity influenced hiring-related perceptions of job applicants. Given doxing's characteristics, we expanded the "decision space" to include effects about expected organizational image and expected retaliation. In Study 1, we found that the type of information and party similarity influenced suspicion of the applicant and perceived similarity with the applicant, whereas doxing only influenced suspicion. In turn, suspicion and perceived similarity predicted expected task performance and organizational image, and exploratory analyses suggested an interactive effect of these variables. Suspicion also predicted expected retaliation from individuals outside the organization. In Study 2, we confirmed that doxing was related to suspicion as well as the interactive effect of information type and party similarity. We explain that interaction using the notion of symbolic threat. In both studies, the effects of type of information and party similarity were pervasive. Our results support the similarity-attraction paradigm and a model of political affiliation. Expanding relevant theories to include suspicion helps better understand politically related judgments and the additional outcomes of expected organizational image and retaliation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Political affiliation and employment screening decisions: The role of similarity and identification processes.

Recent research in political science, along with theory in applied psychology, has suggested that political affiliation may be associated with substantial levels of affect and, thus, might influence employment decision-makers. We designed 2 experiments using social media screening tasks to examine the effects of political affiliation similarity on ratings of hireability. Our findings in both studies suggest that the identification (capturing positive affect) and disidentification (capturing negative affect) of a decision-maker with a job applicant's political affiliation were important variables that influenced perceived similarity. Consistent with the similarity-attraction paradigm, perceived similarity was related to liking and, in turn, liking was related to expected levels of applicant task and organizational citizenship behavior performance. Further, in both studies, political affiliation related variables influenced hireability decisions over and above job-relevant individuating information. Future research should continue to examine political affiliation similarity, particularly in light of its frequent availability to decision-makers (e.g., via social media websites). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The role of political affiliation in employment decisions: A model and research agenda.

Organizational researchers have studied how individuals identify with groups and organizations and how this affiliation influences behavior for decades (e.g., Tajfel, 1982). Interestingly, investigation into political affiliation and political affiliation similarity in the organizational sciences is extremely rare. This is striking, given the deep political divides that exist between groups of individuals described in the political science literature. We draw from theories based on similarity, organizational identification, and person-environment fit, as well as theoretical notions related to individuating information, to develop a model, the political affiliation model (PAM), which describes the implications of political affiliation and political similarity for employment decisions. We set forth a number of propositions based on PAM, to spur future research in the organizational sciences for a timely topic which has received little attention. (PsycINFO Database Record

The moderating role of subordinate political skill on supervisors' impressions of subordinate ingratiation and ratings of subordinate interpersonal facilitation.

Nearly 2 decades ago, social influence theorists called for a new stream of research that would investigate why and how influence tactics are effective. The present study proposed that political skill affects the style of execution of influence attempts. It utilized balance theory to explain the moderating effect of employee political skill on the relationships between self- and supervisor-reported ingratiation. Additionally, supervisor reports of subordinate ingratiation were hypothesized to be negatively related to supervisor ratings of subordinate interpersonal facilitation. Results from a combined sample of 2 retail service organizations provided evidence that subordinates with high political skill were less likely than those low in political skill to have their demonstrated ingratiation behavior perceived by targets as a manipulative influence attempt. Also, when subordinates were perceived by their supervisors to engage in more ingratiation behavior, the subordinates were rated lower on interpersonal facilitation. Implications of these findings, limitations, and future research directions are provided.