Distances and directions: An emotional journey into the recovery process.

Positive emotions stemming from leisure activities are often promoted as a way to achieve a state of recovery, in particular by counteracting negative emotions experienced throughout the workday. Yet the recovery literature frequently takes an undifferentiated view of both the positive emotions employees experience as well as the negative emotions employees are recovering from. This implicitly assumes that all positive emotions are equally effective in facilitating recovery from all negative emotions. Drawing from theory treating emotional movements as a metaphorical journey, we develop a framework for understanding recovery that highlights the importance of the distance and direction that individuals "travel" when moving from negative emotions to positive emotions during the recovery process. We argue that the negative emotions that people start with from work-that is, their emotional origin-as well as the positive emotions that people end with following leisure activities-that is, their emotional destination-jointly influence the state of being recovered. Across two studies using experience-sampling methodologies, we find that "shorter" journeys consisting of emotional destinations that match the activation level of emotional origins (e.g., experiencing high activation positive emotion [HAP] to counter high activation negative emotion) are effective in promoting recovery, while "longer" journeys consisting of mismatches (e.g., experiencing HAP to counter low activation negative emotion) are ineffective for recovery. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Stopping surface-acting spillover: A transactional theory of stress perspective.

Faking one's emotional display to fit situational norms, otherwise known as surface acting, has long been regarded as harmful to employees at work. A nascent body of literature has begun to examine the detriments of surface acting beyond the workplace, particularly as they spill over into the homelife. We articulate how the transactional theory of stress serves as a unifying framework that not only explains why surface acting tends to deplete employees and leads to maladaptive responses at home but also what coping strategies can be utilized to halt this spillover process. Using two complementary experience-sampling methodology studies of employee-spouse dyads, we test a spillover model of surface acting. In Study 1 and our Supplement to Study 1, we find support for the buffering role of challenge appraisals on the relationship between surface acting and depletion at work. We also find support for the mitigating role of supportive spousal interactions on the relationship between depletion at work and perceived inauthenticity at home. We also find support for the conditional indirect effect from surface acting at work to relationship satisfaction at home. In Study 2, we develop daily writing exercises to enhance challenge appraisals and supportive spousal interactions, and we find that these interventions also buffer the surface-acting spillover process. Overall, this work demonstrates the importance of both depletion and perceived inauthenticity at home as linked spillover mechanisms and reveals the success of agentic coping mechanisms (in both domains) that can buffer this process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Exchanging one uncertainty for another: Justice variability negates the benefits of justice.

Although the importance of organizational justice is without question, our theoretical and empirical knowledge of the justice phenomenon is focused almost exclusively on mean levels of fair treatment, ignoring whether those mean levels are achieved in a consistent or inconsistent manner. This exclusive focus on average levels of justice is not surprising given the implicit assumption in the justice literature that day-to-day variations in justice are glossed over or reinterpreted by individuals. Building upon recent research demonstrating that variability in justice can be as important as average levels of fair treatment, we leverage tenets of uncertainty management theory to provide a conceptual bridge that integrates justice variability into the group engagement model. Our theoretical model proposes justice variability (arising from fluctuations in one's fair treatment over time) negates the very benefits that average levels of interpersonal justice provide. Results of 2, week-long experience sampling studies (one of 111 employees and one of 352 employees nested in 104 groups), used to construct assessments of day-to-day justice variability, largely supported our predictions regarding interactive effects between average levels of justice and justice variability on judgments of pride in the group and, ultimately, cooperative behavior, providing important takeaways for theory, research, and practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Not all fairness is created equal: A study of employee attributions of supervisor justice motives.

A large body of research demonstrates that employee perceptions of fair treatment matter. The overwhelming focus of these investigations has been on how employees react to whether or not they perceive their supervisor behaved in a fair manner. We contend, however, that employees not only question and react to whether they are treated fairly, but also to why they believe their supervisor acted fairly in the first place. To do so, we consider how employee attributions of supervisor motives for fair treatment influence the cognitive and affective mechanisms by which fair treatment influences employee reactions to fairness. Drawing from the justice actor model, we focus on both cognitive (establishing fairness, identity maintenance, and effecting compliance) and affective (positive affect) motives underlying supervisors' fair treatment. Relying on theory and research on motive attribution and leader affect, we develop predictions for how employees' perceptions of these motives as a result of short-term exchanges over time influence supervisor-directed citizenship behavior through both cognitive (trust in the supervisor) and affective (positive affect) mechanisms. Our experience sampling study of 613 weekly fair events (from 171 employees) largely supported our predictions, demonstrating that attribution of supervisor motives is a meaningful component of an employee's justice experience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Ethical leadership as a substitute for justice enactment: An information-processing perspective.

Why do employees perceive that they have been treated fairly by their supervisor? Theory and research on justice generally presumes a straightforward answer to this question: Because the supervisor adhered to justice rules. We propose the answer is not so straightforward and that employee justice perceptions are not merely "justice-laden." Drawing from theory on information processing that distinguishes between automatic and systematic modes, we suggest that employee justice perceptions are also "ethics-laden." Specifically, we posit that employees with more ethical supervisors form justice perceptions through automatic processing with little scrutiny of or attention paid to a supervisor's justice acts. In contrast, employees with less ethical supervisors rely on systematic processing to evaluate their supervisor's justice enactment and form justice perceptions. Thus, we propose that ethical leadership substitutes for the supervisor's justice enactment. Our results demonstrate support for the interactive effect of supervisor justice enactment and ethical leadership on employee justice perceptions, and we further demonstrate its consequences for employees' engagement in discretionary behaviors (citizenship and counterproductive behaviors). Our findings highlight an assumption in the justice literature in need of revision and opens the door to further inquiry about the role of information processing in justice perceptions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Turning frowns (and smiles) upside down: A multilevel examination of surface acting positive and negative emotions on well-being.

The consensus in the emotional labor literature is that surface acting is "bad" for employees. However, the evidence on which this consensus is based has been derived from contexts emphasizing the display of positive emotions, such as customer service. Despite the acknowledgment that many contexts also require the display of negative emotions, scholarly work has proceeded under the assumption that surface acting is harmful regardless of the valence of the emotion being displayed. In this study, we take a hedonic approach to well-being and challenge the consensus that surface acting is bad for employees by examining its effects on changes in emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction, through changes in positive and negative affect, for both positive and negative emotional displays. Using a within-person approach, we focus on managers, whose occupation calls for displays of both positive and negative emotions. Our 3-week, experience-sampling study of 79 managers revealed that faking positive emotions decreases positive affect, which harms well-being more than authentically displaying such emotions. In contrast and counter to what the extant literature would suggest, faking negative emotions decreases negative affect and increases positive affect, which benefits well-being more than authentically displaying such emotions. We further integrate construal level theory with hedonic approaches of emotion to identify trait construal level as an important boundary condition to explain for whom surface acting is harmful versus beneficial. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Justice at the millennium, a decade later: a meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives.

Although a flurry of meta-analyses summarized the justice literature at the turn of the millennium, interest in the topic has surged in the decade since. In particular, the past decade has witnessed the rise of social exchange theory as the dominant lens for examining reactions to justice, and the emergence of affect as a complementary lens for understanding such reactions. The purpose of this meta-analytic review was to test direct, mediating, and moderating hypotheses that were inspired by those 2 perspectives, to gauge their adequacy as theoretical guides for justice research. Drawing on a review of 493 independent samples, our findings revealed a number of insights that were not included in prior meta-analyses. With respect to social exchange theory, our results revealed that the significant relationships between justice and both task performance and citizenship behavior were mediated by indicators of social exchange quality (trust, organizational commitment, perceived organizational support, and leader-member exchange), though such mediation was not apparent for counterproductive behavior. The strength of those relationships did not vary according to whether the focus of the justice matched the target of the performance behavior, contrary to popular assumptions in the literature, or according to whether justice was referenced to a specific event or a more general entity. With respect to affect, our results showed that justice-performance relationships were mediated by positive and negative affect, with the relevant affect dimension varying across justice and performance variables. Our discussion of these findings focuses on the merit in integrating the social exchange and affect lenses in future research.

Sleep and organizational citizenship behavior: the mediating role of job satisfaction.

We examine sleep as an important factor beyond the work domain that is relevant to organizational citizenship behavior. In a field study of 87 employees from a variety of organizations, an objective measure of sleep quantity predicted organizational citizenship behavior directed toward organizations but not organizational citizenship behavior directed toward individuals. Additionally, job satisfaction mediated this relationship. In a second field study of 85 working college students, we found that natural variation in daily sleep over the course of a work week predicted daily variance in organizational citizenship behavior directed toward both individuals and organizations, and that job satisfaction mediated these relationships. Based on these findings, we discuss theoretical and practical implications of sleep-deprived employees.

An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: the role of managerial motives and discretion.

Research on organizational justice has focused primarily on the receivers of just and unjust treatment. Little is known about why managers adhere to or violate rules of justice in the first place. The authors introduce a model for understanding justice rule adherence and violation. They identify both cognitive motives and affective motives that explain why managers adhere to and violate justice rules. They also draw distinctions among the justice rules by specifying which rules offer managers more or less discretion in their execution. They then describe how motives and discretion interact to influence justice-relevant actions. Finally, the authors incorporate managers' emotional reactions to consider how their actions may change over time. Implications of the model for theory, research, and practice are discussed.

The popularity contest at work: who wins, why, and what do they receive?

In 2 studies, the authors investigated the popularity of employees at work. They tested a model that positioned personality in the form of core self-evaluations and situational position in the form of communication network centrality as antecedents of popularity and interpersonal citizenship and counterproductive work behaviors received from coworkers as outcomes of popularity. Data from 116 employees and 383 coworkers in Study 1 and 139 employees, their significant others, and 808 coworkers in Study 2 generally supported the model. Core self-evaluations and communication network centrality were positively related to popularity, and popular employees reported receiving more citizenship behaviors and fewer counterproductive work behaviors from their coworkers than less popular employees, even controlling for interpersonal liking. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

The role of core self-evaluations in the coping process.

In 2 studies, the authors investigated whether core self-evaluations (CSE) serve as an integrative framework for understanding individual differences in coping processes. A meta-analytic review demonstrated that CSEs were associated with fewer perceived stressors, lower strain, less avoidance coping, more problem-solving coping, and were not strongly related to emotion-focused coping. Consistent with the meta-analytic results, a daily diary study demonstrated that individuals with high CSE perceived fewer stressors, experienced less strain after controlling for stressors, and engaged in less avoidance coping. However, both studies demonstrated that emotional stability was uniquely related to the stress and coping process and that emotional stability moderated the relationship between stressors and strain. The discussion focuses on the distinction between depressive self-concept represented by CSE and the anxiety and worry represented by emotional stability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

Justice as a dependent variable: subordinate charisma as a predictor of interpersonal and informational justice perceptions.

Research in the organizational justice literature has shown that interpersonal and informational justice are significant predictors of subordinate attitudes and behaviors. However, scholars have neglected to explore whether certain subordinate characteristics might be associated with managers' adherence to interpersonal and informational justice rules. The current authors' study tested a model, inspired by approach-avoidance perspectives (e.g., Gray, 1990), in which manager ratings of subordinate charisma influenced subordinate ratings of interpersonal and informational justice through the mechanisms of positive and negative sentiments (i.e., emotions felt by the manager toward the subordinate). A field study of 181 employees of a large national insurance company revealed partial support for this model. Structural equation modeling revealed that subordinate charisma was related to interpersonal justice perceptions, a relationship that was fully mediated by positive and negative sentiments. However, subordinate charisma was not associated with informational justice perceptions. These findings signal the potential utility in examining subordinate-based predictors of justice variables.

Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: a meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance.

The trust literature distinguishes trustworthiness (the ability, benevolence, and integrity of a trustee) and trust propensity (a dispositional willingness to rely on others) from trust (the intention to accept vulnerability to a trustee based on positive expectations of his or her actions). Although this distinction has clarified some confusion in the literature, it remains unclear (a) which trust antecedents have the strongest relationships with trust and (b) whether trust fully mediates the effects of trustworthiness and trust propensity on behavioral outcomes. Our meta-analysis of 132 independent samples summarized the relationships between the trust variables and both risk taking and job performance (task performance, citizenship behavior, counterproductive behavior). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling supported a partial mediation model wherein trustworthiness and trust propensity explained incremental variance in the behavioral outcomes when trust was controlled. Further analyses revealed that the trustworthiness dimensions also predicted affective commitment, which had unique relationships with the outcomes when controlling for trust. These results generalized across different types of trust measures (i.e., positive expectations measures, willingness-to-be-vulnerable measures, and direct measures) and different trust referents (i.e., leaders, coworkers).

Self-efficacy and work-related performance: the integral role of individual differences.

The present study estimated the unique contribution of self-efficacy to work-related performance controlling for personality (the Big 5 traits), intelligence or general mental ability, and job or task experience. Results, based on a meta-analysis of the relevant literatures, revealed that overall, across all studies and moderator conditions, the contribution of self-efficacy relative to purportedly more distal variables is relatively small. Within moderator categories, there were several cases in which self-efficacy made unique contributions to work-related performance. For example, self-efficacy predicted performance in jobs or tasks of low complexity but not those of medium or high complexity, and self-efficacy predicted performance for task but not job performance. Overall, results suggest that the predictive validity of self-efficacy is attenuated in the presence of individual differences, though this attenuation does depend on the context.

Hostility, job attitudes, and workplace deviance: test of a multilevel model.

The authors tested a model, inspired by affective events theory (H. M. Weiss & R. Cropanzano, 1996), that examines the dynamic nature of emotions at work, work attitudes, and workplace deviance. Sixty-four employees completed daily surveys over 3 weeks, reporting their mood, job satisfaction, perceived interpersonal treatment, and deviance. Supervisors and significant others also evaluated employees' workplace deviance and trait hostility, respectively. Over half of the total variance in workplace deviance was within-individual, and this intraindividual variance was predicted by momentary hostility, interpersonal justice, and job satisfaction. Moreover, trait hostility moderated the interpersonal justice-state hostility relation such that perceived injustice was more strongly related to state hostility for individuals high in trait hostility.