The Effect of Empathy on Team Members’ Moqi in Virtual Teams: A Moderated Mediation Model

References

• Townsend AM, DeMarie SM, Hendrickson AR. Virtual teams: technology and the workplace of the future. Acad Manage Exec. 1998;12(3):17–29.
   Google Scholar
• Miles RE, Snow CC. Organizations: new concepts for new forms. Calif Manage Rev. 1986;28(3):62–73. doi:10.2307/41165202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng X, Li L, Zhang F, Zhu M. The roles of power distance orientation and perceived insider status in the subordinates’ moqi with supervisors and sustainable knowledge-sharing. Sustainability. 2019;11(5):1421. doi:10.3390/su11051421
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen XP, Cole BM. Achieving mutual understanding without saying a word: the conceptualization of moqi and a nomological network. Manag Organ Rev. 2022;18:1–29. doi:10.1017/mor.2022.9
   Google Scholar
• Li L, Zheng X, Sun S. from deep-level similarity to subordinate moqi: the mediating role of leader-member exchange. Front Psychol. 2022;13:879284. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.879284
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhong J, Zhang L, Xiao H, Wen Q. Antecedents and consequences of follower moqi: leader humility, follower humility, and knowledge hiding. Curr Psychol. 2021;1–12. doi:10.1007/s12144-021-02001-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Li T, Yu X, Tang Y. Task interdependence and Moqi in virtual teams in China: the mediating role of virtual collaboration and the moderating role of distributive justice climate. Chinese Manag Stud. 2021;16(1):1–25. doi:10.1108/CMS-06-2020-0264
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng X, Li N, Harris T, Liao H, Chiaburu D. Unspoken yet understood: an introduction and initial framework of subordinates’ moqi with supervisors. J Manage. 2017;45:014920631668764. doi:10.1177/0149206316687642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberg N, Eggum ND, Di Giunta L. Empathy- related responding: associations with prosocial behavior, aggression, and intergroup relations. Soc Issues Policy Rev. 2010;4(1):143–180. doi:10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conway T, Swift JS. International relationship marketing - The importance of psychic distance. Eur J Mark. 2000;34(11/12):1391–1414. doi:10.1108/03090560010348641
   Google Scholar
• Winter R, Leanage N, Roberts N, Norman RI, Howick J. Experiences of empathy training in healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Patient Educ Couns. 2022;105(10):3017–3037. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2022.06.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung FMC, Zhang J, Cheung SF. From indigenous to cross-cultural personality: the case of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory. In: The Oxford Handbook of Chinese Psychology. Oxford library of psychology. Oxford University Press; 2010:295–308.
   Google Scholar
• Blau PM. Exchange and Power in Social Life. 2nd ed. Routledge; 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Zakaria N, Mohd Yusof SA. Crossing cultural boundaries using the internet: toward building a model of swift trust formation in global virtual teams. J Int Manag. 2020;26(1):100654. doi:10.1016/j.intman.2018.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boursier V, Gioia F, Musetti A, Schimmenti A. COVID-19-related fears, stress and depression in adolescents: the role of loneliness and relational closeness to online friends. J Hum Behav Soc Environ. 2022;1(1):1–23. doi:10.1080/10911359.2022.2059605
   Google Scholar
• Flores LE, Eckstrand KL, Silk JS, et al. Adolescents’ neural response to social reward and real-world emotional closeness and positive affect. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2018;18(4):705–717. doi:10.3758/s13415-018-0598-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaski T, Niemi J, Pullins E. Rapport building in authentic B2B sales interaction. Ind Mark Manag. 2018;69:235–252. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen YH, Lin TP, Yen D. How to facilitate inter-organizational knowledge sharing: the impact of trust. Inf Process Manag. 2014;51. doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.03.007
   Google Scholar
• Bowlby J. Attachment and Loss, 2: Separation, Anxiety and Anger. Penguin Books Ltd.; 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Li L, Zheng X, Sun S, Diaz I. Does subordinate moqi affect leadership empowerment? Leadersh Organ Dev J. 2020;41(8):1015–1034. doi:10.1108/LODJ-08-2019-0351
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gacasan EMP, Wiggins MW, Searle BJ. The role of cues in expert project manager sensemaking. Constr Manag Econ. 2016;34(7–8):492–507. doi:10.1080/01446193.2016.1177190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giora R. Understanding figurative and literal language: the graded salience hypothesis. Cogn Linguist. 1997;8:183–206. doi:10.1515/cogl.1997.8.3.183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badaracco JL. Alliances speed knowledge transfer. Planning Review. 1991;19(2):10–16. doi:10.1108/eb054318
   Google Scholar
• Sobol MG, Lei D. Environment, manufacturing technology, and embedded knowledge. Int J Hum Fact Manuf. 1994;4(2):167–189. doi:10.1002/hfm.4530040205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nonaka I. The knowledge-creating company. In: Neef D, Siesfeld A, Cefola J, editors. The Economic Impact of Knowledge. Routledge; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Cuff B, Brown S, Taylor L, Howat D. Empathy: a review of the concept. Emot Rev. 2016;8:144–153. doi:10.1177/1754073914558466
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duan C, Hill CE. The current state of empathy research. J Couns Psychol. 1996;43(3):261–274. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.43.3.261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliott R, Bohart AC, Watson JC, Greenberg LS. Empathy. Psychotherapy. 2011;48(1):43–49. doi:10.1037/a0022187
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Graaff J, Carlo G, Crocetti E, Koot HM, Branje S. Prosocial behavior in adolescence: gender differences in development and links with empathy. J Youth Adolescence. 2018;47(5):1086–1099. doi:10.1007/s10964-017-0786-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decety J, Lamm C. Human empathy through the lens of social neuroscience. Sci World J. 2006;6:1146–1163. doi:10.1100/tsw.2006.221
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian Q, Robertson J. How and when does perceived CSR affect employees’ engagement in voluntary pro-environmental behavior? J Bus Ethics. 2019;155. doi:10.1007/s10551-017-3497-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robert LP, Denis AR, Hung YTC. Individual swift trust and knowledge-based trust in face-to-face and virtual team members. J Manag Inf Syst. 2009;26(2):241–279. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222260210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breuer C, Hüffmeier J, Hibben F, Hertel G. Trust in teams: a taxonomy of perceived trustworthiness factors and risk-taking behaviors in face-to-face and virtual teams. Hum Relat. 2020;73(1):3–34. doi:10.1177/0018726718818721
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sassenrath C, Diefenbacher S, Pfattheicher S, Keller J. The potential and limitations of empathy in changing health-relevant affect, cognition and behaviour. Eur Rev Soc Psychol. 2022;33(2):255–288. doi:10.1080/10463283.2021.1963590
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone T, Levett-Jones T. A comparison of three types of stimulus material in undergraduate mental health nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2014;34. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.07.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flickinger TE, Saha S, Roter D, et al. Clinician empathy is associated with differences in patient-clinician communication behaviors and higher medication self-efficacy in HIV care. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99(2):220–226. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2015.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westendorp J, Stouthard J, Meijers MC, et al. The power of clinician-expressed empathy to increase information recall in advanced breast cancer care: an observational study in clinical care, exploring the mediating role of anxiety. Patient Educ Couns. 2021;104(5):1109–1115. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.025
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shamay-Tsoory SG, Hertz U. Adaptive empathy: a model for learning empathic responses in response to feedback. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022;17(4):1008–1023. doi:10.1177/17456916211031926
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grondin F, Lomanowska AM, Jackson PL. Empathy in computer-mediated interactions: a conceptual framework for research and clinical practice. Clin Psychol (New York). 2019;26:17. doi:10.1111/cpsp.12298
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aw SS, Ilies R, De Pater IE. Dispositional empathy, emotional display authenticity, and employee outcomes. J Appl Psychol. 2020;105:1036–1046. doi:10.1037/apl0000471
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medler-Liraz H, Seger-Guttmann T. Authentic emotional displays, leader–member exchange, and emotional exhaustion. J Leadersh Organ Stud. 2018;25(1):76–84. doi:10.1177/1548051817725266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dutton J, Heaphy E. The power of high quality connections. In: Cameron K, Dutton JE, Quinn RE, editors. Positive Organizational Scholarship. Berrett-Koehler Publishers; 2003:263–278.
   Google Scholar
• Smith R, Rose A. The “cost of caring” in youths’ friendships: considering associations among social perspective taking, co-rumination, and empathetic distress. Dev Psychol. 2011;47:1792–1803. doi:10.1037/a0025309
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Bedem NP, Willems D, Dockrell JE, van Alphen PM, Rieffe C. Interrelation between empathy and friendship development during (pre)adolescence and the moderating effect of developmental language disorder: a longitudinal study. Soc Dev. 2019;28(3):599–619. doi:10.1111/sode.12353
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bierly P, Stark E, Kessler E. The moderating effects of virtuality on the antecedents and outcome of NPD team trust. J Prod Innov Manage. 2009;26:551–565. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00680.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wied M, Branje S, Meeus W. Empathy and conflict resolution in friendship relations among adolescents. Aggress Behav. 2007;33:48–55. doi:10.1002/ab.20166
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrizales A, Gülseven Z, Lannegrand L. The mediating role of empathy in the links between relationships with three socialisation agents and adolescents’ prosocial behaviours. J Soc Pers Relat. 2022;2022:02654075221099652. doi:10.1177/02654075221099652
   Google Scholar
• Bolino M, Turnley W, Bloodgood J. Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations. Acad Manage Rev. 2002;27:505. doi:10.2307/4134400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff N, Whiting S, Podsakoff P, Blume B. Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol. 2009;94. doi:10.1037/a0013079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emerson RM. Social exchange theory. Annu Rev Sociol. 1976;2:335–362. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.02.080176.002003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meira JV, Hancer M. Using the social exchange theory to explore the employee-organization relationship in the hospitality industry. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag. 2021;33(2):670–692. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-06-2020-0538
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsen MK, Gu M, Tan CM, Goh SK. Does flexible work arrangements decrease or increase turnover intention? A comparison between the social exchange theory and border theory. Int J Sociol Soc Policy. 2021;42(11–12):962–983. doi:10.1108/IJSSP-08-2021-0196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brueller D, Carmeli A. Linking capacities of high-quality relationships to team learning and performance in service organizations. Hum Resour Manage. 2011;50. doi:10.1002/hrm.20435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Eliyahu A, Yoviene Sykes LA, Rhodes JE. Someone who ‘gets’ me: adolescents’ perceptions of positive regard from natural mentors. Mentor Tutoring. 2021;29(3):305–327. doi:10.1080/13611267.2021.1927438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh B, Gillespie C, Greer J, Eanes B. Influence of dyadic mutuality on counselor trainee willingness to self-disclose clinical mistakes to supervisors. Clin Superv. 2002;21:83–98. doi:10.1300/J001v21n02_06
   Google Scholar
• Barnes JG. Closeness, strength, and satisfaction: examining the nature of relationships between providers of financial services and their retail customers. Psychol Mark. 1997;14(8):765–790. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199712)14:8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen XP, Chen CC. On the intricacies of the Chinese guanxi: a process model of guanxi development. Asia Pac J Manag. 2004;21(3):305–324. doi:10.1023/B:APJM.0000036465.19102.d5
   Google Scholar
• Chen XP, Peng S. Guanxi Dynamics: shifts in the closeness of ties between Chinese coworkers. Manag Organ Rev. 2008;4(1):63–80. doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2007.00078.x
   Google Scholar
• Homburg C, Stierl M, Bornemann T. Corporate social responsibility in business-to-business markets: how organizational customers account for supplier corporate social responsibility engagement. J Marketing. 2013;77:54–72. doi:10.1509/jm.12.0089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung SW, Cheng MJ, Hou CE, Chen NR. Inclusion in global virtual teams: exploring non-spatial proximity and knowledge sharing on innovation. J Bus Res. 2021;128:599–610. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberg J, Glikson E, Lisak A. Multicultural virtual team performance: the impact of media choice and language diversity. Small Group Res. 2021;52(5):507–534. doi:10.1177/1046496420985614
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flood F. Leadership in the remote, freelance, and virtual workforce era. In: Farazmand A editor. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer International Publishing; 2019:1–5. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3825-1
   Google Scholar
• Shaver PR, Mikulincer M, Cassidy J. Attachment, caregiving in couple relationships, and prosocial behavior in the wider world. Curr Opin Psychol. 2019;25:16–20. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.02.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wellman B, Berkowitz SD. Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge University Press; 1988:xii, 513.
   Google Scholar
• Granovetter MS. The strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol. 1973;78(6):1360–1380. doi:10.1086/225469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill TA, Hancock SE, Zivkov K, Larson NL, Law SJ. Team decision making in virtual and face-to-face environments. Group Decis Negot. 2016;25(5):995–1020. doi:10.1007/s10726-015-9465-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynard MT, Mathieu JE, Gilson LL, Sanchez R, Dean D. Do I really know you and does it matter? Unpacking the relationship between familiarity and information elaboration in global virtual teams. Group Organ Manag. 2019;44(1):3–37. doi:10.1177/1059601118785842
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavanaugh A, Reese DD, Carroll JM, Rosson MB. Weak ties in networked communities. In: Huysman M, Wenger E, Wulf V editors. Communities and Technologies. Springer Netherlands; 2003:265–286. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-0115-0_14
   Google Scholar
• Mikulincer M, Shaver P. Attachment theory and emotions in close relationships: exploring the attachment-related dynamics of emotional reactions to relational events. Pers Relatsh. 2005;12:149–168. doi:10.1111/j.1350-4126.2005.00108.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brislin RW. Back-Translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross Cult Psychol. 1970;1(3):185–216. doi:10.1177/135910457000100301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James LR, Demaree RG, Wolf G. rwg: an assessment of within-group interrater agreement. J Appl Psychol. 1993;78(2):306–309. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James LR. Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. J Appl Psychol. 1982;67(2):219–229. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carmeli A, Brueller D, Dutton J. Learning behaviours in the workplace: the role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety. Syst Res Behav Sci. 2009;26:81–98. doi:10.1002/sres.932
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonzalez-Mulé E, Cockburn B, McCormick W, Zhao B. Team tenure and team performance: a meta-analysis and process model. Pers Psychol. 2020;73(1):151–198. doi:10.1111/peps.12319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aubé C, Rousseau V, Tremblay S. Team size and quality of group experience: the more the merrier? Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2011;15:357–375. doi:10.1037/a0025400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ngo HY, Lau CM, Foley S. Strategic human resource management, firm performance, and employee relations climate in China. Hum Resour Manage. 2008;47(1):73–90. doi:10.1002/hrm.20198
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff P, Organ D. Self- report in organizational research. J Manage. 1986;12:531–544. doi:10.1177/014920638601200408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams LJ, Cote JA, Buckley MR. Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: reality or artifact? J Appl Psychol. 1989;74:462–468. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siebdrat F, Hoegl M, Ernst H. Subjective distance and team collaboration in distributed teams. J Prod Innov Manage. 2013;31. doi:10.1111/jpim.12122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trahan MH, Morley RH, Shafer K. Father- adolescent relationship closeness: a path analysis of family factor associates with father-adolescent engagement and relationship quality. Child Adolesc Soc Work J. 2021;38(3):265–282. doi:10.1007/s10560-020-00677-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamani ED, Pouloudi N. Shared mental models and perceived proximity: a comparative case study. Inf Technol People. 2021;35(2):723–749. doi:10.1108/ITP-02-2020-0072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loi R, Chan KW, Lam L. Leader–member exchange, organizational identification, and job satisfaction: a social identity perspective. J Occup Organ Psychol. 2013;87. doi:10.1111/joop.12028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan L, Mahmood M, Uddin Md A. Supportive Chinese supervisor, innovative international students: a social exchange theory perspective. Asia Pacific Educ Rev. 2019;20(1):101–115. doi:10.1007/s12564-018-9572-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garba OA, Babalola MT, Guo L. A social exchange perspective on why and when ethical leadership foster customer-oriented citizenship behavior. Int J Hosp Manag. 2018;70:1–8. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.10.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spake DF, Bishop JS Jr. The impact of perceived closeness on the differing roles of satisfaction, trust, commitment, and comfort on intention to remain with a physician. Health Mark Q. 2009;26(1):1–15. doi:10.1080/07359680802473281
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stephens JP, Heaphy ED, Carmeli A, Spreitzer GM, Dutton JE. Relationship quality and virtuousness: emotional carrying capacity as a source of individual and team resilience. J Appl Behav Sci. 2013;49(1):13–41. doi:10.1177/0021886312471193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leroy H, Buengeler C, Veestraeten M, Shemla M, Hoever IJ. Fostering team creativity through team-focused inclusion: the role of leader harvesting the benefits of diversity and cultivating value-in-diversity beliefs. Group Organ Manag. 2022;47(4):798–839. doi:10.1177/10596011211009683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan D. So why ask me? Are self-report data really that bad? In: Lance CE, Vandenberg RJ, editors. Statistical and Methodological Myths and Urban Legends: Doctrine, Verity and Fable in the Organizational and Social Sciences. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; 2009:309–336.
   Google Scholar
• Liu J, Zhu Y. Promoting tacit knowledge application and integration through guanxi and structural holes. J Knowl Manag. 2020;25(5):1027–1058. doi:10.1108/JKM-02-2020-0090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie B, Li M. Coworker Guanxi and job performance: based on the mediating effect of interpersonal trust. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2021;171:120981. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120981
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang BX. Developing guanxi in the West: chinese expatriates’ adjustment in Europe. In: Wang BX editor. Guanxi in the Western Context: Intra-Firm Group Dynamics and Expatriate Adjustment. Springer International Publishing; 2019:67–101. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-24001-1_4
   Google Scholar
• Grandinetti R. Exploring the dark side of cooperative buyer-seller relationships. J Bus Ind Mark. 2017;32(2):326–336. doi:10.1108/JBIM-04-2016-0066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiyomiya T. Collaborative organizational communication and its impact on ethical dilemmas. Int Stud Manag Organ. 2012;42(3):49–68. doi:10.2753/IMO0020-8825420303
   Google Scholar