Target Meaning-Making of Workplace Incivility Based on Perceived Personality Similarity with Perpetrators

References

• Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24, 452–471. doi:10.2307/259136
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20–39. doi:10.2307/258189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., & Wilson, D. C. (2008). What are the odds? How demographic similarity affects the prevalence of perceived employment discrimination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 235–249. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.235
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barger, P., Behrend, T., S., Sharek, D., J., & Sinar, E., F. (2011). IO and the crowd: Frequently asked questions about using Mechanical Turk for research. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 49, 11–17.
   Google Scholar
• Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 377–391. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohner, G., Bless, H., Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1988). What triggers causal attributions? The impact of valence and subjective probability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 335–345. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420180404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolger, N., & Zuckerman, A. (1995). A framework for studying personality in the stress process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 890–902. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.69.5.890
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradfield, M., & Aquino, K. (1999). The effects of blame attributions and offender likableness on forgiveness and revenge in the workplace. Journal of Management, 25(5), 607–631. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2063(99)00018-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5. doi:10.1177/1745691610393980
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunk, J. A., & Magley, V. J. (2013). The role of appraisals and emotions in understanding experiences of workplace incivility. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18, 87–105. doi:10.1037/a0030987
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996). Person-organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 294–311. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2009). Patterns and profiles of response to incivility in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 272–288. doi:10.1037/a0014934
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 64–80. doi:10.1037/1076-8998.6.1.64
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dierdorff, E. C., Bell, S. T., & Belohlav, J. A. (2011). The power of “we” Effects of psychological collectivism on team performance over time. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 247–262. doi:10.1037/a0020929
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. R. (2007). Polynomial regression and response surface methodology. In C. Ostroff & T. A. Judge (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit (pp. 361–372). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. M. (2009). The value of value congruence. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 654–677. doi:10.1037/a0014891
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1577–1613. doi:10.5465/256822
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, G. R., & Judge, T. A. (1991). Personnel/human resources management: A political influence perspective. Journal of Management, 17, 447–488. doi:10.1177/014920639101700208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia, R. L., Bergsieker, H. B., & Shelton, J. N. (2017). Racial attitude (dis)similarity and liking in same-race minority interactions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, 501–518. doi:10.1177/1368430215612224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.2.93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grandey, A. A., Dickter, D. N., & Sin, H. P. (2004). The customer is not always right: Customer aggression and emotion regulation of service employees. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 397–418. doi:10.1002/job.252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and the effect of surface-versus deep-level diversity on group cohesiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 96–107. doi:10.2307/256901
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, teams and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1029–1045. doi:10.2307/3069328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological Review, 51, 358–374. doi:10.1037/h0055425
   Google Scholar
• Hershcovis, M. S. (2011). Incivility, social undermining, bullying…Oh My! A call to reconcile constructs within workplace aggression research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 499–519. doi:10.1002/job.689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hershcovis, M., S., & Barling, J. (2007). Towards a relational model of workplace aggression. In J. Langan-Fox, C. L. Cooper, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Research companion to the dysfunctional workplace: Management challenges and symptoms (pp. 268–284). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Hoever, I. J., van Knippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 982–996. doi:10.1037/a0029159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homan, A. C., Hollenbeck, J. R., Humphrey, S. E., van Knippenberg, D., Ilgen, D. R., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2008). Facing differences with an open mind: Openness to experience, salience of intragroup differences, and performance of diverse work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 1204–1222. doi:10.5465/amj.2008.35732995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homan, A. C., van Knippenberg, D., Van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2007). Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: Diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1189–1199. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeanquart-Barone, S. (1993). Trust differences between supervisors and subordinates: Examining the role of race and gender. Sex Roles, 29, 1–11. doi:10.1007/BF00289993
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The Big Five Inventory–Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.
   Google Scholar
• John, O., P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102–138). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, E. E., & Harris, V. A. (1967). The attribution of attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 3, 1–24. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(67)90034-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judge, T. A., Scott, B. A., & Ilies, R. (2006). Hostility, job attitudes, and workplace deviance: Test of a multilevel model. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 126–138. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.126
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabat-Farr, D., Cortina, L. M., & Marchiondo, L. A. (2018). The emotional aftermath of incivility: Anger, guilt, and the role of organizational commitment. International Journal of Stress Management, 25(2), 109–129. doi:10.1037/str0000045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members’ need for cognition. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 581–598. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2009.41331431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 457–501. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.002325
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent, R., & Martinko, M. (1995). The development and evaluation of a scale to measure organizational attributional style. In M. Martinko. (Ed.), Attribution theory: An organizational perspective (pp. 53–75). Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristof-Brown, A. L., & Guay, R. P. (2011). Person-environment fit. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), American Psychological Association Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, (vol. 3, pp. 3–50). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Landers, R. N., & Behrend, T. S. (2015). An inconvenient truth: Arbitrary distinctions between organizational, Mechanical Turk, and other convenience samples. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8, 142–164. doi:10.1017/iop.2015.13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarus, R. S. (1993). From psychological stress to the emotions: A history of changing outlooks. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 1–21. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.44.020193.000245
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarus, R. S., (2001). Relational meaning and discrete emotions. In K., Scherer, A., Schorr, T. & Johnstone, (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, and research (pp. 37–67). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Liao, H., Joshi, A., & Chuang, A. (2004). Sticking out like a sore thumb: Employee dissimilarity and deviance at work. Personnel Psychology, 57, 969–1000. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00012.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim, S., Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2008). Personal and workgroup incivility: Impact on work and health outcomes. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 95–107. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim, V. K., & Teo, T. S. (2009). Mind your E-manners: Impact of cyber incivility on employees’ work attitude and behavior. Information & Management, 46, 419–425. doi:10.1016/j.im.2009.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mak, A. S., Blewitt, K., & Heaven, P. C. L. (2004). Gender and personality influences in adolescent threat and challenge appraisals and depressive symptoms. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1483–1496. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00243-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marchiondo, L. A., Cortina, L. M., & Kabat-Farr, D. (2018). Targets’ attributions and appraisals of workplace incivility: Finding light on the dark side?. Applied Psychology: International Review, 67(3), 369–400. doi:10.1111/apps.12127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milam, A. C., Spitzmueller, C., & Penney, L. M. (2009). Investigating individual differences among targets of workplace incivility. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 58–69. doi:10.1037/a0012683
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milliken, F. J., & Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21, 402–433. do:10.5465/amr.1996.9605060217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, S. K., & Axtell, C. M. (2001). Seeing another viewpoint: Antecedents and outcomes of employee perspective taking. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1085–1100. doi:10.2307/3069390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paulin, D., & Griffin, B. (2016). The relationships between incivility, team climate for incivility and job-related employee well-being: A multilevel analysis. Work & Stress, 30, 132–151. doi:10.1080/02678373.2016.1173124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615–631. doi:10.1287/orsc.7.6.615
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelled, L. H, Ledford, G. E., & Mohrman, S. A. (1999). Demographic dissimilarity and workplace inclusion. Journal of Management Studies, 36, 1013–1031. doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, C., Semmel, A., V., Baeyer, C., Abramson, L., Metalsky, G., I., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1982). The attributional style questionnaire. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 3, 287–300. doi:10.1007/BF01173577
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porath, C. L., & Pearson, C. M. (2012). Emotional and behavioral responses to workplace incivility and the impact of hierarchical status. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, E326–E357. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.01020.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raver, J. L. (2013). Counterproductive work behavior and conflict: Merging complementary domains. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 6, 151–159. doi:10.1111/ncmr.12013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raver, J. L., & Barling, J. (2008). Workplace aggression and conflict: Constructs, commonalities, and challenges for future inquiry. In C. K. W. DeDreu & M. J. Gelfand (Eds.), The psychology of conflict and conflict management in organizations (pp. 211–244). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, M. E. (1986). The repulsion hypothesis: On the nondevelopment of relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1156–1166. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salovey, P., & Grewal, D. (2005). The science of emotional intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 281–285. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00381.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaubroeck, J., & Lam, S. S. K. (2002). How similarity to peers and supervisor influences organizational advancement in different cultures. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1120–1136. doi:10.5465/3069428
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sessa, V. I. (1996). Using perspective taking to manage conflict and affect in teams. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 101–115. doi:10.1177/0021886396321007
   Google Scholar
• Shanock, L. R., Baran, B. E., Gentry, W. A., Pattison, S. C., & Heggestad, E. D. (2010). Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: A powerful approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of difference scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 543–554. doi:10.1007/s10869-010-9183-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaver, K. G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 101. doi:10.1037/h0028777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skarlicki, D. P., Folger, R., & Tesluk, P. (1999). Personality as a moderator in the relationship between fairness and retaliation. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 100–108. doi:10.5465/256877
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, J. P., Barrick, M. R., & Connerley, M. L. (2001). An investigation of personality similarity effects (relational & perceived) on peer and supervisor ratings and the role of familiarity and liking. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 637–657. doi:10.1348/096317901167569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sung, S., Choi, J., & Kim-Jo, T. (2014). Personality dissimilarity and work-related outcomes: Asymmetric effects and moderating role of group tenure. Group Dynamics: Theory Research and Practice, 18, 1–19. doi:10.1037/a0034411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, S. G., & Kluemper, D. H. (2012). Linking perceptions of role stress and incivility to workplace aggression: the moderating role of personality. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17, 316–329. doi:10.1037/a0028211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tekleab, A. G., & Quigley, N. R. (2014). Team deep-level diversity, relationship conflict, and team members' affective reactions: A cross-level investigation. Journal of Business Research, 67, 394–402. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tepper, B. J., Moss, S., & Duffy, M. K. (2011). Antecedents of abusive supervision: Supervisor perceptions of deep-level dissimilarity, relationship conflict, and subordinate performance. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 279–294. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2011.60263085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsui, A. S., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1989). Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Review, 32, 402–423. doi:10.5465/256368
   Google Scholar
• Turban, D. B., & Jones, A. P. (1988). Supervisor-subordinate similarity: Types, effects, and mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 228. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.73.2.228
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vangelisti, A. L., & Young, S. L. (2000). When words hurt: The effects of perceived intentionality on interpersonal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 393–424. doi:10.1177/0265407500173005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh, B. M., Magley, V. J., Reeves, D. W., Davies-Schrils, K. A., Marmet, M. D., & Gallus, J. A. (2012). Assessing workgroup norms for civility: The development of the Civility Norms Questionnaire-Brief. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 407–420. doi:10.1007/s10869-011-9251-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1994). Manual for the positive and negative affect schedule (Expanded form). Unpublished manuscript. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa.
   Google Scholar
• Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Weiner, B., Amirkhan, J., Folkes, V. S., & Verette, J. A. (1987). An attributional analysis of excuse giving: Studies of a naïve theory of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(2), 316–324. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.2.316
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar