Building on conservation of resources theory, we cast resource depletion as a novel explanatory mechanism to explain why employees' experience of psychological contract violation results in harm to third parties outside the employee-organization exchange dyad. This resource-based perspective extends and complements the dominant social exchange perspective which views employee reactions to psychological contract violation as targeting the source of the violation-the organization. The present article reports on 3 studies. Study 1 conducted an experiment with 109 participants and established the main effect of psychological contract violation on resource depletion. Study 2, using survey data from 315 medical employees and their immediate supervisors, found that after controlling for the social exchange mechanism (i.e., revenge cognitions toward the organization), resource depletion mediated the indirect effects of psychological contract violation on supervisory reports of employees' interpersonal harming toward coworkers and decision-making vigilance for clients. Further, we found that organizational and professional identification played opposing moderating roles in the effects of violation on resource depletion and consequently behavioral outcomes, such that these mediated relationships were stronger when organizational identification was high, and weaker when professional identification was high. Study 3 replicated all the results obtained in Studies 1 and 2 with time-lagged data from 229 medical employees across 3 measurement points. The findings confirm that resource depletion is a more effective explanation of the consequences of violation on third parties than revenge cognitions, although both are useful in predicting organization-directed outcomes (i.e., civic virtue and organizational rule compliance). (PsycINFO Database Record

Collectivistic cultures have been characterized as having harmonious, cooperative ingroup relationships. However, we find evidence that people in collectivistic cultures are more vigilant toward ingroup members, mindful of their possible unethical intentions. Study 1 found that Chinese participants were more vigilant than Americans in within-group competitions, anticipating more unethical behaviors from their peers. Study 2 replicated this finding by comparing areas within China, finding that people from China’s collectivistic rice-farming regions exhibit greater ingroup vigilance than people from the less collectivistic wheat-farming regions. The rice/wheat difference was mediated by greater perceived within-group competition. Study 3 found that Chinese participants were more likely than Americans to interpret a peer’s friendly behavior as sabotage in disguise. We also manipulated within-group competition and found that it increased ingroup vigilance in both cultures. Finally, study 3 identified two boundary conditions where cultural differences in ingroup vigilance decrease: an unambiguously competitive win–lose situation where Americans also exhibit vigilance, and an unambiguously cooperative win–win situation where Chinese participants relax their vigilance. This research contributes to a more balanced view of collectivism, revealing its interpersonal tensions in the forms of within-group competition and ingroup vigilance.

The lack of health human resources is a global issue. China also faces the same issue, in addition to the equity of human resources allocation. With the launch of new healthcare reform of China in 2009, have the issues been improved? Relevant data from China Health Statistical Yearbook and a qualitative study show that the unequal allocation of health human resources is getting worse than before.

We investigated the cultural differences in understanding and reacting to the babyface in an effort to identify both cultural and gender biases in the universal hypothesis that the babyfaced individuals are perceived as naïve, cute, innocent, and more trustworthy. Sixty-six Chinese and Sixty-six American participants were required to evaluate Chinese faces selected from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)—Pose, Expression, Accessories, and Lighting (PEAL) Large-Scale Chinese Face Database. In our study, we applied Active Shape Models, a modern technique of machine learning to measure facial features. We found some cultural similarities and also found that a Chinese babyface has bigger eyes, higher eyebrows, a smaller chin, and greater WHR (Facial width-to-height ratio), and looks more attractive and warmer. New findings demonstrate that Chinese babyfaces have a lower forehead and closer pupil distance (PD). We found that when evaluating the babyfacedness of a face, Chinese are more concerned with the combination of all facial features and American are more sensitive to specific highlighted babyfaced features. The Chinese babyface tended to be perceived as more babyfaced for American participants, but not less competent for Chinese participants.

Background Violence against doctors in China is a serious problem that has attracted attention from both domestic and international media. Objective This study investigates readers’ responses to media reports on violence against doctors to identify attitudes toward perpetrators and physicians and examine if such trends are influenced by national policies. Methods We searched 17 Chinese violence against doctors reports in international media sources from 2011 to 2020. We then tracked back the original reports and web crawled the 19,220 comments in China. To ascertain the possible turning point of public opinion, we searched violence against doctors–related policies from Tsinghua University ipolicy database from 2011 to 2020, and found 19 policies enacted by the Chinese central government aimed at alleviating the intense patient–physician relationship. We then conducted a series of interrupted time series analyses to examine the influence of these policies on public sentiment toward violence against doctors over time. Results The interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) showed that the change in public sentiment toward violence against doctors reports was temporally associated with government interventions. The declarations of 10 of the public policies were followed by increases in the proportion of online public opinion in support of doctors (average slope changes of 0.010, P<.05). A decline in the proportion of online public opinion that blamed doctors (average level change of –0.784, P<.05) followed the declaration of 3 policies. Conclusions The government’s administrative interventions effectively shaped public opinion but only temporarily. Continued public policy interventions are needed to sustain the reduction of hostility toward medical doctors.