This dissertation sought to examine the interactive effects of participant gender, aggression type (physical vs. relational), aggressor gender, and target gender on two sets of dependent variables. The first set consisted of a performance rating, the acceptability of the aggression, the perceived aggressiveness of the aggressor, and the perceived aggressiveness of the act. The second set consisted of perceived masculinity, perceived femininity, and perceived gender ideal. The main hypothesis was that gender stereotypes of aggression would influence performance evaluations of aggressive behavior. Other hypotheses were based on previous research regarding the effect of gender and aggression type on the acceptability and perceived aggressiveness of the aggressive behavior. Hypotheses regarding the gender perception dependent variables were based on the connection between aggression and gender stereotypes. In order to test the study hypotheses, a sample of 552 adults was recruited via an online crowdsourcing tool. Although most of the study hypotheses were not supported, the other significant results suggest that physical aggression is generally perceived to be more aggressive than relational aggression, and that there appears to be a strong connection between the female stereotype and relational aggression, even more so than the connection between the male stereotype and physical aggression, among other findings. The lack of effect of participant gender and lack of significant effects on the performance rating variable suggest that there may be less potential for discrimination in the evaluation of aggressive behavior.

Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) is deliberate behavior by employees that harms the interests of their organization or its members. Previous research suggests that job stress, including a variety of individual job stressors, lead to CWB (e.g., Penney & Spector, 2005; Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Spector, Fox, & Domagalski, 2006) and that CWB is an ineffective coping strategy for dealing with job stress (Shoss, Jundt, Kobler, & Reynolds, 2015). Job crafting is a form of individual-level job redesign that has been shown to reduce the negative effects of stress, but less is known about job crafting’s relationship with CWB or whether it could function as a more effective coping mechanism for job stress. The purpose of this study was to examine the role of job crafting as a moderator of the relationship between job stress and CWB. Additionally, this study examined job crafting’s relationship to CWB and to five common job stressors: interpersonal conflict, workload, job insecurity, role ambiguity, and organizational constraints. Three hundred participants completed a two-part online study through Amazon Mechanical Turk, the first of which assessed participants’ experience of the job stressors of interpersonal conflict (Interpersonal Conflict at Work Scale; Spector & Jex, 1998), workload (Quantitative Workload Inventory; Spector, 1998), organizational constraints (Organizational Constraints Scale; Spector & Jex, 1998), job insecurity (Job Insecurity Scale; Mauno, Leskinen, & Kinnunen, 2001), and role ambiguity (Role Ambiguity Scale; Rizzo, House, & Lirtzman, 1970). The first study session also assessed participants’ work locus of control (Work Locus of Control Scale; Spector, 1988) and negative affectivity (Negative Affectivity subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). The second study session was conducted five days after the first study session and assessed participants’ frequency of engagement in CWB (CWB-Checklist; Spector et al., 2006) and frequency of job crafting (Job Crafting Scale; Tims, Bakker, & Derks, 2010). Correlation and hierarchical regression analyses were utilized to test for relationships among these variables and moderation effects. The results showed that composite job stress (the combined, average score across each of the job stressor scales) and each of the five job stressors individually were significantly, positively correlated with CWB. However, within the hierarchical regression analyses, only composite job stress, interpersonal conflict, workload, and role ambiguity were significant predictors of CWB. In addition, job crafting did not predict CWB or moderate the effects of composite job stress or any of the five individual job stressors on CWB. These results suggest that job stress does lead to CWB, but job crafting is likely neither an effective coping mechanism for job stress nor an effective means of reducing CWB in organizations.

A recent meta-analysis by Berry, Ones, and Sackett (2007) revealed that perceptions of organizational justice and employee personality were two significant predictors of counterproductive work behaviors. The facets that make up the organizational justice construct are: procedural justice, distributive justice, interpersonal justice, and informational justice (Berry et al., 2007). Employees perceive justice when organizational justice rules are adhered to. However, when these rules are violated, employees may perceive injustice. The effect of perceived injustice on CWB might depend on individual characteristics, such as personality, particularly Dark Tetrad traits. The Dark Tetrad includes narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism (Buckels, Jones, & Paulhus, 2013). The intent of this study was to investigate the relationship between the Dark Tetrad traits and counterproductive work behaviors, as well as examine the moderating influence of perceived organizational injustice (distributive, procedural, interpersonal, informational, and overall injustice) on the relationship between the Dark Tetrad personality traits and four types of CWB; CWB directed towards supervisors, coworkers, the organization itself, and total CWB. Participants completed a two-part online study through Amazon Mechanical Turk, the first of which assessed perceptions of organizational (in)justice (Full-range justice scale; Colquitt, Long, Rodell, & Halvorsen-Ganepola, 2015) as well as levels of Dark Tetrad personality traits (Short Dark Triad Scale SD-3; Jones and Paulhus, 2014, and the Short Sadistic Impulse Scale SSIS; O'Meara, Davies, & Hammond, 2011). The first part of the survey also assessed participants’ negative affectivity (Negative Affectivity subscale of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988), and justice sensitivity (Victim Perspective subscale of the Justice Sensitivity Scale; Schmitt, Gollwitzer, & Arbach, 2005). The second survey was distributed 5 days after the first survey and assessed participants’ frequency of engagement in each type of CWB (Workplace Deviance Scale (WDS); Bennett & Robinson, 2000; modified using items from the Supervisor-Directed Deviance Scale; Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007). It was hypothesized that each DT trait would have a significant positive relationship with each type of CWB. This hypothesis was shown to be supported. It was also hypothesized that low levels of perceived organizational justice would moderate the relationships between the DT traits and CWB. This hypothesis was partially supported. Linear regression analyses were conducted, and the results showed that none of the justice facets significantly moderated the relationship of Machiavellianism with any of type of CWB. However, several justice facets showed significant moderating effects between the other three DT traits (narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism) and types of CWB. These results suggest that when individuals perceive a higher level of perceived organizational justice, those with dark tetrad personality traits are more likely to report engaging in fewer counterproductive work behaviors, relative to those who perceive lower levels of perceived organizational justice. The implications are that by improving perceptions of organizational justice, organizations could potentially reduce counterproductive work behavior in employees with strong dark tetrad personality traits.

<p> </p><p> </p>

No description available.

Drawing on prior research from several areas of psychology, I predicted that different forms of organizational justice would predict counterproductive work behaviour (CWB) depending on employees’ age. In particular, I predicted that distributive justice would be associated with CWB more so for younger than older employees, whereas interactional justice would be associated with CWB more so for older than younger employees. In an initial study, 192 employees completed an online survey which assessed the focal variables. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed the two predicted 2-way interactions. The findings are in line with aging research suggesting that, whereas younger people are more motivated by instrumental concerns, relational concerns become more salient as they age. The results have important implications for research on justice and CWB, and they extend basic research on human aging to an applied context.

In this study perceived ethical leadership was examined as a moderator of the relationship between the dark triad personality traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy and counterproductive work behavior (CWB) using a sample of 208 employees recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. These participants completed measures of personality (Short Dark Triad; Jones & Paulhus, 2014), counterproductive workplace behavior (Counterproductive Work Behavior Checklist; Spector et al., 2006), and employee perception of their direct supervisor’s ethical leadership (Brown, Treviño, & Harrison, 2005). Participants were compensated $0.65 for completing the survey. Correlation and moderation analyses (Hayes, 2012) were used to analyze data. Significant correlations suggest that individuals scoring high on Machiavellianism and psychopathy also reported engaging in more CWB. The relationship between Narcissism and counterproductive workplace behavior approached significance in the predicted direction. Machiavellianism and psychopathy were not negatively related to the employee’s perception of their supervisor’s ethical leadership. Narcissism was significantly positively related to an employee’s perception of their supervisor’s ethical leadership. Finally, ethical leadership did not moderate the relationship between Machiavellianism or psychopathy and CWB. Ethical leadership did not moderate the relationship between Narcissism and CWB, but results were approaching significance in the predicted direction. These results suggest that employees who are manipulative and lack empathy were more likely to engage in harmful behaviors in the workplace such as abuse, production deviance, sabotage, theft, and withdrawal. Further, employees who were more narcissistic and have a grandiose view of themselves were more likely to view their leaders as ethical. Overall, the results of this study indicate that perceived ethical leadership does not affect the frequency in which employees high in narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy reported engaging in counterproductive work behaviors.

No description available.

Counter-productive workplace behavior (CWB) is defined as any intentional behavior on the part of an organization member viewed by the organization as contrary to its legitimate interests. A growing body of literature reveals that individual variables and pre-employment integrity tests can play a strong role in the prediction of CWB. The empirical literature has failed to clarify which type of individual level antecedents, or types of integrity test items, are more predictive of CWB. The current study evaluated data collected from restaurant employees (N=464) that measured items relating to personality tendencies, attitudes toward acceptance of counter-productive behaviors, work and high school background, and admissions of counter-productive behavior. A confirmatory factor analysis revealed a mediocre fit to a typology of CWB (interpersonal CWB vs. organizational CWB). Correlation analysis revealed that only specific attitudinal items and empirically keyed biodata items were significantly related to CWB. Hierarchical regression analysis found that attitudinal items paralleling admissions of CWB contributed variance beyond that of other personality and work and high school background antecedents.

The vast majority of social exclusion research has taken place outside of the workplace (i.e., in social settings). In addition, researchers often use a myriad of terms (i.e., ostracism, exclusion, rejection) when describing and investigating exclusion-related phenomena thus contributing to widespread conceptual confusion with respect to this construct. Moreover, past studies have failed to consider the role of social exchange in determining how individuals may react to being excluded by others particularly in a work setting. I sought to address these issues by conducting three multi-wave studies which develop and test a social-exchange based model of interpersonal workplace exclusion (IWE). Specifically, I created and validated two measures (i.e., coworker and supervisor) of IWE. In addition, I examined the discriminant, convergent and predictive validity of these scales. The results of these studies produced two distinct, unidimensional measures of IWE an 8-item coworker IWE scale and an 8-item supervisor IWE scale. Additional analyses revealed that IWE is negatively related to, albeit distinct from, workplace inclusion and is part of the broader conceptual domain of antisocial workplace behavior which includes theoretically similar constructs namely, workplace incivility, counterproductive workplace behavior and workplace bullying. In addition, IWE was found to be negatively related to perceived interpersonal fair treatment, job satisfaction and leader-member exchange (LMX) as well as positively related to job induced tension. Lastly, results of the third study provided support for an exchange-based model of IWE such that both coworker and supervisor IWE measures were associated with employee social undermining behavior, reduced effort and lower levels of organizational citizenship behaviors.