Coping with daily boredom:Exploring the relationships of job boredom, counterproductive work behavior, organizational citizenship behavior, and cognitive reappraisal

Given that job boredom is experienced by more than half of the workforce on a daily basis, more scientific research on its potential outcomes and moderators is warranted. This study examined whether daily fluctuations in job boredom are associated with daily increases or decreases in counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior, and whether individual differences in cognitive reappraisal moderated these relationships. Our hypotheses were tested in a daily diary study (396 daily observations); results indicated that the predicted positive relationships of job boredom with both active and passive counterproductive work behavior were supported, whereas the direction of the relationship between job boredom and organizational citizenship behavior was person-specific. Contrary to our expectations, cognitive reappraisal did not moderate any of the above relationships. Our results clearly show that scores on these constructs vary more within than between individuals and suggest that combining the within- and between-person levels, both in theorizing and analyses, is necessary to understand these phenomena better

The Promise of Just-in-Time Adaptive Interventions for Organizational Scholarship and Practice: Conceptual Development and Research Agenda

Organizational researchers are now making widespread use of ecological momentary assessments but have not yet taken the logical next step to ecological momentary interventions, also called Just-in-Time Adaptive Interventions (JITAIs). JITAIs have the potential to test within-person causal theories and maximize practical benefits to participants through two developmental phases: The microrandomized trial and the randomized controlled trial, respectively. In the microrandomized trial design, within-person randomization and experimental manipulation maximize internal validity at the within-person level. In the randomized controlled trial design, interventions are delivered in a timely and ecological manner while avoiding unnecessary and ill-timed interventions that potentially increase participant fatigue and noncompliance. Despite these potential advantages, the development and implementation of JITAIs require consideration of many conceptual and methodological factors. Given the benefits of JITAIs, but also the various considerations involved in using them, this review introduces organizational behavior and human resources researchers to JITAIs, provides guidelines for JITAI design, development, and evaluation, and describes the extensive potential of JITAIs in organizational behavior and human resources research

Privacy at work: A review and a research agenda for a contested terrain

Ministry of Education, Singapore under its Academic Research Funding Tier

Privacy at work: A review and a research agenda for a contested terrain

Ministry of Education, Singapore under its Academic Research Funding Tier

Job satisfaction as mediator: An assessment of job satisfaction's position within the nomological network

Job satisfaction\u27s position within the nomological network and the mechanism outlined by theories of social exchange suggest that job satisfaction functions as a mediator of the relationship between various antecedent variables and volitional workplace behaviours. We extend social exchange theory to include perceptions of the total job situation and develop a model that positions job satisfaction as a mediator of the relationships between various internal and external antecedent variables, and three volitional workplace behaviours: citizenship behaviours, counterproductive workplace behaviours, and job withdrawal. The fit of a fully mediated model is good and all four classes of antecedents (dispositions, workplace events, job characteristics, job opportunities) contributed uniquely to the prediction of satisfaction. Job satisfaction is also shown to mediate most antecedent‐consequence relationships, although two important exceptions are evident. A direct link from pro‐social disposition to OCBs, and a direct link and one from anti‐social disposition to counterproductivity, suggest that job satisfaction does not fully moderate the relationships between dispositions and contextual behaviours

Maximizing as a predictor of job satisfaction and performance: A tale of three scales

Research on individual differences in maximizing (versus satisficing) has recently proliferated in the Judgment and Decision Making literature, and high scores on this construct have been linked to lower life satisfaction as well as, in some cases, to worse decision-making performance. The current study exported this construct to the organizational domain and evaluated the utility of the three most widely used measures of maximizing in predicting several criteria of interest to organizational researchers: job satisfaction, intentions to quit the organization, performance in the job role, and income. Moreover, this study used relative weight analyses to determine the relative importance of maximizing and two dispositional variables (conscientiousness and core self-evaluations) that are traditionally used to predict these criteria in the organizational literature. Results indicate that relationships between maximizing and these criteria are influenced by the way in which maximizing is measured. Yet, regardless of how it is measured, maximizing is not a particularly strong predictor of these criteria compared to traditional organizational predictors. Limitations and future research directions are discussed

A Test-Retest Reliability Generalization Meta-Analysis of Judgments Via the Policy-Capturing Technique

Policy capturing is a widely used technique, but the temporal stability of policy-capturing judgments has long been a cause for concern. This article emphasizes the importance of reporting reliability, and in particular test-retest reliability, estimates in policy-capturing studies. We found that only 164 of 955 policy-capturing studies (i.e., 17.17%) reported a test-retest reliability estimate. We then conducted a reliability generalization meta-analysis on policy-capturing studies that did report test-retest reliability estimates—and we obtained an average reliability estimate of .78. We additionally examined 16 potential methodological and substantive antecedents to test-retest reliability (equivalent to moderators in validity generalization studies). We found that test-retest reliability was robust to variation in 14 of the 16 factors examined but that reliability was higher in paper-and-pencil studies than in web-based studies and was higher for behavioral intention judgments than for other (e.g., attitudinal and perceptual) judgments. We provide an agenda for future research. Finally, we provide several best-practice recommendations for researchers (and journal reviewers) with regard to (a) reporting test-retest reliability, (b) designing policy-capturing studies for appropriate reportage, and (c) properly interpreting test-retest reliability in policy-capturing studies

Mistreatment in Organizations: Toward a Perpetrator-Focused Research Agenda

Copyright © 2018 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Cortina, Rabelo, and Holland (2018) have cogently suggested that workplace mistreatment should be viewed through a lens that squarely implicates the perpetrator (i.e., the perpetrator predation framework) rather than through a lens that at least partially absolves the perpetrator while blaming the victim for inviting, or not actively resisting, the mistreatment (i.e., the victim precipitation framework). We agree that the perpetrator predation framework provides a better basis for policy, practice, and law. Furthermore, however, the perpetrator predation framework provides a better basis for science. Whereas Cortina et al. allude briefly to the scientific benefits of a perpetrator-focused framework, the current commentary fleshes out these benefits and outlines an agenda for future perpetrator-focused research on workplace mistreatment

What types of advice do decision-makers prefer?

In the decision-making literature, "advice" has typically been defined very restrictively, as a recommendation concerning which alternative the decision-maker should choose. The present paper examines decision-makers' reactions to this and three additional types of advice (a recommendation concerning which alternative not to choose, information about alternatives, and a recommendation concerning how to make the decision), along with another common form of interpersonal assistance (Social Support), from the perspective of maximizing decision accuracy and maintaining decision autonomy. The role of situational and individual differences is also examined. Results from two multilevel policy-capturing studies indicate that, although they consider recommendations regarding which alternative to choose to be important in some contexts, decision-makers often prefer to receive a type of advice that is greatly understudied by researchers--namely, the provision of information about alternatives. The implications of these findings for the study of advice-taking are discussed, as are future research directions.Advice Recommendation Information Decision Support Social Support Policy-capturing Advisor Assistance Decision-making Individual differences