Emotional and Behavioral Reactions to Social Undermining: a Closer Look at Perceived Offender Motives

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Management Department Faculty Publications Management Department July 2008 Emotional and behavioral reactions to social undermining: A closer look at perceived offender motives Craig Crossley University of Nebraska, Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub Part of the Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons Crossley, Craig, "Emotional and behavioral reactions to social undermining: A closer look at perceived offender motives" (2008). Management Department Faculty Publications. 1. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Management Department at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Management Department Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (2008); doi 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.06.001 Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Used by permission. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07495978 Submitted December 23, 2006; accepted June 2, 2008; published online July 11, 2008. Emotional and behavioral reactions to social undermining: A closer look at perceived offender motives Craig D. Crossley Department of Management, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 1240 114 CBA, Lincoln, NE 68588, USA email [email protected] Abstract This study examined how perceptions of underlying offender motives affect victims’ emotional and behavioral reactions toward their offender. Perceived offender motives of malice and greed were embedded in a cognition–emotion–behavior model based on theories of attribution, forgiveness and revenge, and tested in the context of social undermining. Findings suggested that victims distin- guished between offender malice and greed, and that these attributions shaped subsequent emotional reactions, which in turn dem- onstrated independent relations with revenge, avoidance, and reconciliation. Keywords: motives, affect/emotion, social undermining, attribution, forgiveness, avoidance, anger, sympathy, revenge, generaliz- ability, external validity Introduction extent offenders’ underlying motives may affect victim reactions. Previous studies of social undermining have primarily fo- Social undermining refers to intentional offenses aimed at cused on causes and consequences, assuming that the underly- destroying another’s favorable reputation, their ability to ac- ing motive is to harm the other, perhaps out of jealousy (Dunn complish their work, or their ability to build and maintain pos- & Schweitzer, 2005). However, research has yet to examine other itive relationships (Duffy, Ganster, & Pagon, 2002). It is critical offender motives, such as self-promotion or greed. to understand victims’ reactions to social undermining in or- Although research has yet to empirically examine the role der to promote healthy workplace relationships, increase coop- of perceived offender motives, theorists as early as (Lewin, eration and trust, and prevent conflict escalation. The emerging 1936) and (Heider, 1958) have suggested that identifying the research on social undermining suggests that victims’ reactions function or purpose served by a particular behavior is essen- depend largely on their own perceptions of an offense, and have tial in understanding why people act as they do. The impor- damaging organizational outcomes such as increased counter- tance of an offender’s state of mind is further substantiated by productive behaviors, reciprocated social undermining, and de- the fact that actions that do not actually produce harm can en- creased job satisfaction and retention, as well as negative per- gender negative reactions from would-be victims who believe sonal outcomes such as depression, decreased self-esteem, and that the offender had harmful motives (Miller, 2001). The crim- psychosomatic symptoms (Duffy et al., 2006a; Duffy et al., 2006b; inal justice system has long recognized the importance of un- Duffy et al., 2002). derlying offender motives. For instance, in the landmark DPP Although research has begun to underscore the impact of so- v. Smith case (1961), Smith was leaving a crime scene when cial undermining on individual and organizational well-being, a police officer jumped on top of his car. Smith’s subsequent several critical questions have yet to be examined and may pro- reckless driving caused the officer to fall from the car and get vide important insights into how victims experience and react killed by oncoming traffic. In this case there was little doubt to being socially undermined. For instance, while research has that Smith intentionally drove recklessly. However, the impor- found an important distinction between intentional versus acci- tant question rising from this trial and shaping the legal defini- dental offense (Aquino et al., 2001; Martinko and Zellars, 1998; tion of criminal intent hinged on Smith’s underlying motives Weiner, 2006), research has yet to examine whether or to what (i.e., escape vs. murder). 1 2 C. D. C ROSSLEY IN O RGANIZATI O NAL B EHAVI O R AND H UMAN D ECISI O N P R O CESSES (2008) Clearly, beyond what an offender may have done, victims’ cific underlying motives based on prior qualitative research on perceptions of why an offender acted as they did may provide workplace revenge (Bies and Tripp, 1996; Bies and Tripp, 1998) essential cues in shaping victim reactions. To examine this ques- and on criminal justice literature underscoring the importance tion the present study embedded perceived offender motives of these specific motives (Povinelli, 2001). While findings are within an integrated model of victim reactions based on attribu- likely to generalize to other forms of workplace mistreatment, tion theory (Weiner, 1995), revenge theory (Bies and Tripp, 1996; the present study was examined in the context of social under- Bies and Tripp, 1998) and a theoretical model of forgiveness mining, as social undermining includes the notion of intentional (McCullough, Worthington, & Rachal, 1997). This study empiri- behavior. This allows a test of the unique importance of per- cally tested the effects of perceived motives on victim emotional ceived motives, over and above whether an offense was inten- and behavioral reactions by integrating experimental and field- tional versus accidental. based studies. This study contributes to the literature in at least four ways. Theoretical background and development of hypotheses First, integrating key constructs from models of attribution Theories of attribution and reactions to offense often use (Weiner, 1995; Weiner, 2006), forgiveness (McCullough et al., the cognition–emotion–behavior sequence to explain victim re- 1997) and workplace revenge (Bies & Tripp, 1996), this study sponses. Using this sequence, the present study integrated ele- represented a first attempt to empirically validate direct and in- ments from both top-down perspectives (i.e., attribution theory: direct effects of perceived offender motives within a theoretical Weiner, 1995; Weiner, 2006) that begin with a specific offense network of victim reactions. and examine a range of reactions, as well as bottom-up theories Second, this study digs deeper into the intentional nature of that focus on a specific reaction (i.e., forgiveness or revenge) and workplace offenses to examine the role of underlying offender trace backward to a variety of antecedent emotions and cogni- motives. In other words, moving beyond whether an offense tions. Key constructs were selected from these theoretical per- was intentional, this study examines the relative and unique im- spectives and integrated into the model used in this study. This portance of specific motives of greed and malice in shaping vic- model is depicted in Figure 1, and described in more detail be- tim responses to social undermining. low. This model serves as a theoretically derived nomological Third, using an integrated two-study approach, this research network that allows an examination of how perceived offender replicated findings across a lab experiment and a field study, motives may prohibit pro-social emotions and behaviors and with each approach compensating for limitations inherent in the promote antisocial reactions. other while maximizing both internal and external validity. The Theoretical perspectives of how people respond to an offense, novel use of Multisample Structural Equation Modeling pro- such as social undermining, often begin at the point where the vides a useful template for triangulating findings across meth- offense is first recognized by the victim (Aquino et al., 2004; Bies odological approaches and answers the recent call of researchers and Tripp, 1996; Weiner, 1995). Once people determine that an concerned that measurement issues may invalidate comparisons offense was volitional, they begin an almost immediate sense- of findings across different samples (Vandenberg and Lance, making process to determine the offenders’ underlying motives 2000; Williams et al., 2003). This approach is also of crucial im- (Vonk, 1998). portance in preventing research on attribution and workplace The importance of underlying motives has been reflected in mistreatment from gravitating further

Load more