Search

Existing work on attribution theory distinguishes between external and internal attributions (i.e., "I overcame adversity due to luck" vs. "my own effort"). We introduce the construct of relational resilience attributions (i.e., "due to help from other people") as a critical, but overlooked form of external attribution that predicts compassion toward others. We first document the presence of internal, relational (social external), and situational (nonsocial external) resilience attributions among people who have overcome unemployment, showing the predominance of internal attributions (Study 1). Next, we show that relational attributions uniquely predict compassion toward people struggling to overcome a range of challenges, including losing a loved one (Study 2), quitting smoking (Study 3a), workplace bullying (Study 3b), divorce (Study 4a), and pandemic survival (Study 4b). To examine causality and the malleability of relational attributions, we experimentally induce relational attributions among ex-smokers (Study 5), advanced degree holders (Study 6), and those who completed a fatiguing task (Study 7). We further find that gratitude is one critical link between one's own relational attributions and compassion toward others. Despite the prevailing tendency for people to make internal attributions for their resilience, forming relational attributions is positively associated with greater compassion for others struggling to endure adversity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Millions of employees are victims of violent crimes at work every year, particularly those in the retail industry, who are frequent targets of robbery. Why are some employees injured while others escape from these incidents physically unharmed? Departing from prevailing models of workplace violence, which focus on the static characteristics of perpetrators, victims, and work environments, we examine why and when injuries during robberies occur. Our multimethod investigation of convenience-store robberies sought evidence from detailed coding of surveillance videos and matched archival data, preregistered experiments with formerly incarcerated individuals and customer service personnel, and a 3-y longitudinal intervention study in the field. While standard retail-industry safety protocols encourage employees to be out from behind the cash register area to be safer, we find that robbers are significantly more likely to injure or kill employees who are located there (versus behind the cash register area) when a robbery begins. A 3-y field study demonstrates that changing the safety training protocol-through providing employees with a behavioral script to follow should a robbery begin when they are on the sales floor-was associated with a significantly lower rate of injury during these robberies. Our research establishes the importance of understanding the interactive dynamics of workplace violence, crime, and conflict.

False accusations of wrongdoing are common and can have grave consequences. In six studies, we document a worrisome paradox in perceivers' subjective judgments of a suspect's guilt. Specifically, we found that people (including online panelists, n = 4,983, and working professionals such as fraud investigators and auditors, n = 136) use suspects' angry responses to accusations as cues of guilt. However, we found that such anger is an invalid cue of guilt and is instead a valid cue of innocence; accused individuals (university students, n = 230) and online panelists ( n = 401) were angrier when they are falsely relative to accurately accused. Moreover, we found that individuals who remain silent are perceived to be at least as guilty as those who angrily deny an accusation.

Research has documented conflicting evidence about the relationship between a leader's unpleasant affective displays and team performance. Drawing on the dual threshold model of anger, we propose a novel explanation for this paradox such that the positive relationship between leaders' unpleasant affect and team performance turns negative at high levels of intensity. We examined our hypothesis in a multilevel field study of 304 halftime locker room speeches involving 23 high school and college basketball teams and a follow-up experiment. Our results show support for the prediction and suggest that the curvilinear effect of leaders' unpleasant affective displays may be explained by team members' redirection of attention and approach, which is positively associated with team members' effort at moderate levels of leader unpleasantness but leads to lower effort at high and low levels of leader unpleasantness. We discuss the theoretical contributions for scholarship on leadership, emotions as social information theory, and practical implications of the results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

We posit that the modern airplane is a social microcosm of class-based society, and that the increasing incidence of "air rage" can be understood through the lens of inequality. Research on inequality typically examines the effects of relatively fixed, macrostructural forms of inequality, such as socioeconomic status; we examine how temporary exposure to both physical and situational inequality, induced by the design of environments, can foster antisocial behavior. We use a complete set of all onboard air rage incidents over several years from a large, international airline to test our predictions. Physical inequality on airplanes-that is, the presence of a first class cabin-is associated with more frequent air rage incidents in economy class. Situational inequality-boarding from the front (requiring walking through the first class cabin) versus the middle of the plane-also significantly increases the odds of air rage in both economy and first class. We show that physical design that highlights inequality can trigger antisocial behavior on airplanes. More broadly, these results point to the importance of considering the design of environments-from airplanes to office layouts to stadium seating-in understanding both the form and emergence of antisocial behavior.

Does power corrupt a moral identity, or does it enable a moral identity to emerge? Drawing from the power literature, we propose that the psychological experience of power, although often associated with promoting self-interest, is associated with greater self-interest only in the presence of a weak moral identity. Furthermore, we propose that the psychological experience of power is associated with less self-interest in the presence of a strong moral identity. Across a field survey of working adults and in a lab experiment, individuals with a strong moral identity were less likely to act in self-interest, yet individuals with a weak moral identity were more likely to act in self-interest, when subjectively experiencing power. Finally, we predict and demonstrate an explanatory mechanism behind this effect: The psychological experience of power enhances moral awareness among those with a strong moral identity, yet decreases the moral awareness among those with a weak moral identity. In turn, individuals' moral awareness affects how they behave in relation to their self-interest., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).)

Does emotional intelligence promote behavior that strictly benefits the greater good, or can it also advance interpersonal deviance? In the investigation reported here, we tested the possibility that a core facet of emotional intelligence--emotion-regulation knowledge--can promote both prosocial and interpersonally deviant behavior. Drawing from research on how the effective regulation of emotion promotes goal achievement, we predicted that emotion-regulation knowledge would strengthen the effects of other-oriented and self-oriented personality traits on prosocial behavior and interpersonal deviance, respectively. Two studies supported our predictions. Among individuals with higher emotion-regulation knowledge, moral identity exhibited a stronger positive association with prosocial behavior in a social dilemma (Study 1), and Machiavellianism exhibited a stronger positive association with interpersonal deviance in the workplace (Study 2). Thus, emotion-regulation knowledge has a positive side and a dark side.

We empirically examine the reflexive or automatic aspects of moral decision making. To begin, we develop and validate a measure of an individual's implicit assumption regarding the inherent morality of business. Then, using an in-basket exercise, we demonstrate that an implicit assumption that business is inherently moral impacts day-to-day business decisions and interacts with contextual cues to shape moral behavior. Ultimately, we offer evidence supporting a characterization of employees as reflexive interactionists: moral agents whose automatic decision-making processes interact with the environment to shape their moral behavior.