No abstract

Types of perpetrators of workplace aggression can vary considerably, and recent research has demonstrated that aggression from different perpetrator categories has different implications for victims. We extended research on multifoci aggression and explored affective and cognitive pathways linking verbal aggression from four perpetrator types--supervisors, coworkers, customers, and significant others--and employee morale and turnover intention. Data from a sample of 446 working adults indicated that both emotional strain and employees' corresponding judgments of their social exchange relationships with these perpetrators served as the mechanisms for the association between aggression from supervisors, coworkers, and customers and morale and turnover intention. Coworker aggression had a direct association with turnover intention and significant other aggression was related to turnover intention only through emotional strain. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Individuals with visible disabilities can acknowledge their disabilities in different ways, which may differ in effectiveness. Across four studies, we investigate whether individuals with visible disabilities engage in different acknowledgment strategies (claiming, downplaying) and how and why these different strategies affect evaluations from others. Specifically, we draw from the Stereotype Content Model and Stereotype-Fit Theory to articulate a process whereby claiming and downplaying differentially affect others’ perceptions of competence and warmth, which subsequently affect overall evaluations of the individual with a disability. We found that individuals with visible disabilities intentionally manage others’ impressions by engaging in claiming and downplaying. Claiming strategies (relative to downplaying or not acknowledging) resulted in higher evaluations because they activated perceptions of competence and warmth and the benefits of claiming were stronger for jobs higher in interpersonal demands. We discuss the implications of these results for individuals with disabilities and for organizations.

Subscription orders must be prepaid. Subscriptions are on a calendar year basis only. Allow 4-6 weeks for delivery of the first issue. Call for international subscription rates.

This study addresses how job seekers' experiences of rude and discourteous treatment--incivility--can adversely affect self-regulatory processes underlying job searching. Using the social-cognitive model (Zimmerman, 2000), we integrate social-cognitive theory with the goal orientation literature to examine how job search self-efficacy mediates the relationship between incivility and job search behaviors and how individual differences in learning goal orientation and avoid-performance goal orientation moderate that process. We conducted 3 studies with diverse methods and samples. Study 1 employed a mixed-method design to understand the nature of incivility within the job search context and highlight the role of attributions in linking incivility to subsequent job search motivation and behavior. We tested our hypotheses in Study 2 and 3 employing time-lagged research designs with unemployed job seekers and new labor market entrants. Across both Study 2 and 3 we found evidence that the negative effect of incivility on job search self-efficacy and subsequent job search behaviors are stronger for individuals low, rather than high, in avoid-performance goal orientation. Theoretical implications of our findings and practical recommendations for how to address the influence of incivility on job seeking are discussed.