This study places the reporting of sexual harassment within an integrated model of the sexual harassment process. Two structural models were developed and tested in a sample (N = 6,417) of male and female military personnel. The 1st model identifies determinants and effects of reporting; reporting did not improve--and at times worsened--job, psychological, and health outcomes. The authors argue that organizational responses to reports (i.e., organizational remedies, organizational minimization, and retaliation) as well as procedural satisfaction can account for these negative effects. The 2nd model examines these mediating mechanisms; results suggest that these mediators, and not reporting itself, are the source of the negative effects of reporting. Organizational and legal implications of these findings are discussed.

Our purpose in this study was to meta-analytically address several theoretical and empirical issues regarding the relationships between safety climate and injuries. First, we distinguished between extant safety climate-->injury and injury-->safety climate relationships for both organizational and psychological safety climates. Second, we examined several potential moderators of these relationships. Meta-analyses revealed that injuries were more predictive of organizational safety climate than safety climate was predictive of injuries. Additionally, the injury-->safety climate relationship was stronger for organizational climate than for psychological climate. Moderator analyses revealed that the degree of content contamination in safety climate measures inflated effects, whereas measurement deficiency attenuated effects. Additionally, moderator analyses showed that as the time period over which injuries were assessed lengthened, the safety climate-->injury relationship was attenuated. Supplemental meta-analyses of specific safety climate dimensions also revealed that perceived management commitment to safety is the most robust predictor of occupational injuries. Contrary to expectations, the operationalization of injuries did not meaningfully moderate safety climate-injury relationships. Implications and recommendations for future research and practice are discussed.

Workers bear a heavy share of the burden of how countries contend with COVID-19; they face numerous serious threats to their occupational health ranging from those associated with direct exposure to the virus to those reflecting the conflicts between work and family demands. Ten experts were invited to comment on occupational health issues unique to their areas of expertise. The topics include work-family issues, occupational health issues faced by emergency medical personnel, the transition to telework, discrimination against Asian-Americans, work stressors, presenteeism, the need for supportive supervision, safety concerns, economic stressors, and reminders of death at work. Their comments describe the nature of the occupational health concerns created by COVID-19 and discuss both unanswered research questions and recommendations to help organizations reduce the impacts of COVID-19 on workers.

SummaryMeyer and Allen's ( , 1997 three component conceptualization of organizational commitment (OC) includes affective (AC), continuance (CC), and normative (NC) commitment. However, AC and NC have not been as empirically differentiated as theoretically expected. Drawing on the extant literature, I review, integrate, and expand on arguments and evidence about the lack of AC-NC differentiation. I also propose several avenues for research that could help commitment scholars attain a clearer picture of the true relationship between AC and NC, as the extant literature has inadequately addressed many issues regarding construct differentiation. Specific, testable propositions address a variety of facets of the commitment literature, including construct definition and measurement, developmental processes, relationships among the components and their unique and joint effects on outcomes, and potential moderators of the AC-NC relationship. The goal of this paper is to spur future research into the AC-NC relationship in order to gain greater construct clarity.

Sexual harassment and its corresponding outcomes develop and change over time, yet research on this issue has been limited primarily to cross-sectional data. In this article, longitudinal models of harassment were proposed and empirically evaluated via structural equations modeling using data from 217 women who responded to a computerized questionnaire in 1994 and again in 1996. Results indicate that sexual harassment influences both proximal and distal work-related variables (e.g., job satisfaction, work withdrawal, job withdrawal) and psychological outcomes (e.g., life satisfaction, psychological well-being, distress). In addition, a replication of the L. F. Fitzgerald, F. Drasgow, C.L. Hulin, M.J. Gelfand, and V.J. Magley (1997) model of harassment was supported. This research was an initial attempt to develop integrated models of the dynamic effects of sexual harassment over time.

In this article, we demonstrate that samples in the industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology literature do not reflect the labor market, overrepresenting core, salaried, managerial, professional, and executive employees while underrepresenting wage earners, low-and medium-skill first-line personnel, and contract workers. We describe how overrepresenting managers, professionals, and executives causes research about these other workers to be suspect. We describe several ways that this underrepresentation reduces the utility of the I-O literature and provide specific examples. We discuss why the I-O literature underrepresents these workers, how it contributes to the academic-practitioner gap, and what researchers can do to remedy the issue. IntroductionIt is our contention that the published industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology literature overrepresents salaried, core, managerial, professional, and executive employees and underrepresents wage earners, laborers, firstline personnel, freelancers, contract workers, and other workers outside managerial, professional, and executive positions, relative to the labor market in the United States and around the world. We further contend that this tendency is causing the organizational sciences to miss out on some important caveats to I-O theories, to misunderstand important phenomena, and to overlook phenomena that are defining experiences for many members of the labor market. In this article, we will demonstrate that workers are underrepresented in our published literature. Then, we will explain why we think this w h e r e hav e a l l t h e "wor k e r s " g on e ?85 is problematic for maximizing the utility of I-O theories and the I-O field by providing examples of critical domains in which worker experiences differ from manager, professional, and executive experiences. In the final sections of the article, we explicate some reasons why workers have been undersampled in the I-O psychology literature and make recommendations for some ways this can be remedied.At the outset, it is important to note that this critique focuses squarely on the published literature in I-O psychology. Undoubtedly, there are many organizations that employ wage earners, low-and medium-skill workers, freelancers, contract workers, and other workers with nontraditional work arrangements and include them in their internal research. Our analysis focuses on problems in the recent/current state of the literature in I-O psychology, why this might be occurring, why this matters for the advancement of the science as a whole, how this might contribute to the academic-practice gap, and what we can do about it. Are Workers Really Underrepresented in the Published I-O Psychology Literature?Our first claim is this: Published research in I-O psychology has included samples of salaried, core, highly educated, highly skilled, managerial, professional, and executive employees at a disproportionally high rate and at the expense of other employees, including but not limited to wage earners, lowand mediu...

Dirty work involves tasks that are stigmatized owing to characteristics that the public finds disgusting, degrading, or objectionable. Conservation of resources theory suggests such experiences should induce strain and decreased work satisfaction; social identity theory suggests such work should lead to strong psychological investment in the work, among other outcomes. Integrating these two perspectives, this study hypothesizes and presents quantitative evidence from 499 animal-shelter workers, demonstrating how dirty-work engagement relates to higher levels of strain, job involvement, and reluctance to discuss work while negatively influencing work satisfaction. Additionally, this study takes a unique perspective on dirty work by focusing on dirty tasks within a dirty-work occupation. The data suggest meaningful differences between the outcomes of dirty-task frequency and dirty-task psychological salience, providing additional insight into the complexity of stigmatized occupations and ways in which future research and theory benefit as a result.

Sexual harassment research has been primarily limited to examination of the phenomena in U.S. organizations; attempts to explore the generalizability of constructs and theoretical models across cultures are rare. This study examined (a) the measurement equivalence of survey scales in U.S. and Turkish samples using mean and covariance structure analysis and (b) the generalizability of the L. F. Fitzgerald, F. Drasgow, C. L. Hulin, M. J. Gelfand, and V. J. Magley (1997) model of sexual harassment to the Turkish context using structural equations modeling. Analyses used questionnaire data from 336 Turkish women and 455 women from the United States. The results indicate that, in general, the survey scales demonstrate measurement equivalence and the pattern of relationships in the Fitzgerald et al. model generalizes to the Turkish culture. These results support the usefulness of the model for explaining sexual harassment experiences in a variety of organizational and cultural contexts.