An Eye for an Eye? A Meta-Analysis of Negative Reciprocity in Organizations

• 成果类型: Article
• 署名作者: Greco, Lindsey M.; Whitson, Jennifer A.; O'Boyle, Ernest H.; Wang, Cynthia S.; Kim, Joongseo
• 署名单位: Oklahoma State University System; Oklahoma State University - Stillwater; University of California System; University of California Los Angeles; Indiana University System; IU Kelley School of Business; Indiana University Bloomington; Northwestern University; Pennsylvania Commonwealth System of Higher Education (PCSHE); Pennsylvania State University
• 刊物名称: JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY
• ISSN/ISSBN: 0021-9010
• DOI: 10.1037/apl0000396
• 发表日期: 2019
• 页码: 1117-1143
• 关键词: negative workplace behaviors; NEGATIVE RECIPROCITY; social exchange theory; Meta-analysis

摘要

Most models of negative workplace behaviors (NWB) are individual in nature, focusing on individual attitudes (e.g., satisfaction) and general workplace perceptions (e.g., procedural justice) that motivate NWB . Less commonly considered are explorations of relationally based negative workplace behaviors-how NWB from Party A is related to reciprocation of NWB from Party B. Based on 2 competing conceptualizations in the literature, that behavior is reciprocated in-kind in an eye for an eye exchange or that behavior tends to escalate or spiral over time, we develop a framework for negative reciprocity that considers NWB in terms of severity, activity, and target. This framework addresses (a) whether Party A's NWB is associated with behavior of a similar or greater level (i.e., activity and severity) from Party B; and (b) whether Party B's reciprocating behavior is directed back at Party A (i.e., direct) or transferred onto others (i.e., displaced). We meta-analytically test these relationships with 246 independent samples (N = 96,930) and find strongest support for relationships indicating that NWB from Party A is largely returned in-kind, followed closely by relationships indicative of escalation. We also found that as the frequency of Party A's NWB increases, so too does the frequency of reciprocity behavior of equal levels. Surprisingly, differences related to the target of the behavior as well as differences based on whether the data were cross-sectional or longitudinal were generally negligible.