What does it cost you to get there? The effects of emotional journeys on daily outcomes.

Scholarly understanding of emotions and emotion regulation rests on two incompatible truths-that positive emotions are positively beneficial and should be pursued, and that changing emotions may come at a cost. With both perspectives in mind, to really conclude that pursuing higher positive affect (PA) is a worthy journey, we must take into account the cost of that journey itself. We build from the affect shift literature and draw on self-regulation theories to argue that, although end-states characterized by more positive (and fewer negative) emotions will be beneficial, the emotional changes required to "get there" will have consequences for employee regulatory resources and subsequent behavior. In Study 1, we use experience sampling methodology to track employee emotional journeys-changes in emotions in terms of directionality (e.g., toward pleasure and away from pain) and distance (i.e., magnitude of change in terms of intensity changes within-emotions as well as magnitude of change in activation/valence level between emotions)-that capture the amount of emotion regulation preceding emotion end-states. Teasing apart variance attributable to the end-state versus the journey, we demonstrate that steeper daily PA trajectories (steeper increases in intensity of positive, activated emotions) and valence trajectories (steeper movement away from more negative emotions toward more positive emotions) lead to psychological depletion, ultimately triggering interpersonal counterproductive work behaviors and harming citizenship and performance. In Study 2, we test our core propositions in a lab experiment, demonstrating that different emotional journeys "leading up" to the same affective end-state can change the meaning of that end-state. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

To and fro: The costs and benefits of power fluctuation throughout the day.

Power is a ubiquitous element of organizational relationships. Historically in the organizational and social sciences, power has most commonly been evaluated statically. Although this approach has been beneficial thus far, it may be inconsistent with the realities that most individuals face in organizations. Rather, we suggest that individuals' sense of power changes, even within a given day. Thus, we introduce the concept of power fluctuation to better explain the phenomenon that one's sense of power varies over time. We position power fluctuation as a form of micro role transition and draw from the social distance theory of power to posit that such fluctuation throughout the day has both positive and negative consequences. Specifically, we suggest that daily power fluctuation (day-to-day, within-person variance in power fluctuation) as well as general power fluctuation (person-to-person, between-person variance in power fluctuation) increase perspective taking and contribution to team performance, but those benefits come at an emotional cost (i.e., frustration and emotional exhaustion). The results of our multilevel experience sampling study of 845 matched-responses from 103 employee-coworker dyads largely support our predictions of the manifestation and consequences of power fluctuation. The implications of power fluctuation for theory and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 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).

Meaningfulness misfit: Consequences of daily meaningful work needs-supplies incongruence for daily engagement.

There is a general consensus that meaningful work is a positive attribute-at a general level, it attracts people to jobs and motivates positive outcomes. Yet, at the same time that organizations are focusing their attention on providing employees with greater meaning, day-to-day engagement of employees has been trending downward. In this study, we challenge several prevailing assumptions in the literature to suggest that, even though meaningful work is generally a sought after and desirable characteristic in a job, employees' daily experiences with their work present a more complex picture. Based on the idea that employees' construals of their daily experiences are more granular than those associated with their overall experiences, we use a person-environment fit lens to explore the idea that mismatches between meaningful work received and meaningful work needed on a given day may lead to lower engagement, both in situations of deficiency and excess. Based on a daily within-person examination, we found that although meaningfulness positively influenced daily engagement through increased attentiveness, both too little and too much meaningful work was fatiguing, reducing engagement levels. Combined, these findings suggest that the relationship between meaningful work and engagement is somewhat different depending on whether it is considered between-persons or within-person. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Content validation guidelines: Evaluation criteria for definitional correspondence and definitional distinctiveness.

Several reviews have been critical of the degree to which scales in industrial/organizational psychology and organizational behavior adequately reflect the content of their construct. One potential reason for that circumstance is a tendency for scholars to focus less on content validation than on other validation methods (e.g., establishing reliability, performing convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validation, and examining factor structure). We provide clear evaluation criteria for 2 commonly used content validation approaches: Anderson and Gerbing (1991) and Hinkin and Tracey (1999). To create those guidelines, we gathered all new scales introduced in Journal of Applied Psychology, Academy of Management Journal, Personnel Psychology, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes from 2010 to 2016. We then subjected those 112 scales to Anderson and Gerbing's (1991) and Hinkin and Tracey's (1999) approaches using 6,240 participants from Amazon's Mechanical Turk with detailed, transparent, and replicable instructions. For both approaches, our results provide evaluation criteria for definitional correspondence-the degree to which a scale's items correspond to the construct's definition-and definitional distinctiveness-the degree to which a scale's items correspond more to the construct's definition than to the definitions of other orbiting constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).