EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY

Nicholas Howald

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

May 2019

Committee:

Margaret Brooks, Advisor

George Bullerjahn Graduate Faculty Representative

William O'Brien

Michael Zickar

ii ABSTRACT

Margaret Brooks, Advisor

Personality constructs are often used in organizational psychology as predictors of job performance, job satisfaction, and other important outcomes. Alexithymia is a personality trait which has received very little attention in the organizational literature, but may also be a useful predictor of these outcomes. Alexithymia describes the relative inability to think about, identify, and express emotions. This trait is integrated with Affective Events Theory in order to explore whether it affects emotions and other outcomes. Through two studies from distinct samples, the role of alexithymia as a moderating variable is tested. In addition, the incremental predictive validity of alexithymia above and beyond the five-factor model of personality is examined. The results indicate that alexithymia may act as a moderator of some emotional experiences at work, but primarily seems to affect outcomes for college students. Alexithymia significantly incrementally predicts variance in several outcomes for students and employees and may be especially useful for predicting contextual performance. Implications for future research and practice involving alexithymia are discussed.

iii

This dissertation is dedicated to my wife, Kelsey. Thank you for your constant love and support.

iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my advisor, Maggie, for her guidance and advice throughout my graduate career. Additionally, I’d like to thank my committee members for the time and the feedback they’ve given me on this dissertation.

This work would not have been possible without the support from my family. Thank you for helping and encouraging me throughout my undergraduate and graduate experiences. To

Mom, especially, thank you for always motivating and believing in me.

I want to acknowledge the close friends I’ve made at Bowling Green who have provided invaluable advice, assistance, and companionship over the past four years – thank you to

Brendan Lortie, Shelby Wise, Sami Nesnidol, and Ivica Pavisic for making graduate school a more enjoyable and edifying experience. Finally, thank you to all Bowling Green graduate students, alumni, and faculty who have helped me throughout graduate school and have directly or indirectly made this dissertation possible.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Alexithymia ...... 2

Affective Events Theory ...... 6

The Present Studies ...... 13

METHOD ...... 15

Study One ...... 15

Participants and Procedure ...... 15

Measures ...... 15

Alexithymia ...... 15

Five-factor model traits ...... 16

Events ...... 16

Emotions...... 17

College satisfaction ...... 17

College engagement ...... 17

Student counterproductive work behaviors ...... 17

Student organizational citizenship behaviors ...... 18

Academic performance ...... 18

Study Two ...... 18

Participants and Procedure ...... 18

Measures ...... 19

Five-factor model traits ...... 19 vi

Work events ...... 20

Emotions...... 20

Alexithymia ...... 20

Job satisfaction ...... 20

Engagement ...... 21

Counterproductive work behaviors ...... 21

Organizational citizenship behaviors ...... 21

RESULTS ...... 22

DISCUSSION ...... 30

Mediation and Moderation ...... 30

Prediction of Workplace Outcomes ...... 34

Alexithymia and Emotions ...... 36

Limitations ...... 37

Conclusions ...... 39

REFERENCES ...... 41

APPENDIX A. TABLES ...... 52

APPENDIX B. FIGURES ...... 58

APPENDIX C. STUDY ONE INSTRUMENT ...... 63

APPENDIX D. STUDY TWO INSTRUMENT ...... 98

APPENDIX E. IRB LETTER ...... 122

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 1

INTRODUCTION

Organizational psychologists have widely accepted the utility of personality traits for predicting employee performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991), job satisfaction (Judge, Heller, &

Mount, 2002), and several other workplace outcomes (e.g., Alarcon, Eschleman, & Bowling,

2009; Christian, Bradley, Wallace, & Burke, 2009; Bono & Judge, 2004). The measurement of a person’s “relatively stable and enduring pattern of thoughts, feelings, and actions” (Barrick &

Mount, 2000, p. 20) can uniquely contribute to prediction by tapping into motivational tendencies to act a certain way (e.g., committing energy and effort toward completing a work task) rather than an employee’s capacity to act (e.g., ability to complete a work task).

Throughout several meta-analyses and primary studies, measures of personality traits have shown incremental validity beyond that of ability measures in predicting important outcomes, demonstrating their utility to both researchers and practitioners (Barrick & Mount, 2005).

By far the most commonly used structure of personality traits is the five-factor model

(Goldberg, 1990). This model posits that the personality traits of conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability, extraversion, and openness to experience cover a broad domain of human personality and explain much of human behavior. Several researchers have expanded beyond the five factors to include more specific personality facets that are arranged hierarchically below the broad factors (Ashton, 1998), as well as personality aspects that are conceptually located above the facets, but below the broad factors (DeYoung, Quilty, &

Peterson, 2007). Scholars have also worked toward identifying personality traits which exist independently from the space of the five factors (Ashton, Lee, & de Vries, 2014). In fact, the development of the five-factor model has been criticized for intentionally neglecting traits that could have been included in a more complete model of personality (Block, 1995). There is EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 2 substantial evidence that several such traits outside of the five-factor model exist and can usefully predict behavior, including religiosity (Paunonen & Jackson, 2000), honesty-humility

(Ashton & Lee, 2005), proactive personality (Bateman & Crant, 1993), and the dark triad of personality (Spain, Harms, & LeBreton, 2014).

Another personality trait which has received little attention in the organizational literature, but has potential to add useful predictive power, is alexithymia. Established in the early 1970s (Sifneos, 1973), alexithymia refers to “deficits in the cognitive processing and regulation of emotions” (Taylor, 2000, p. 135). People high in alexithymia have difficulty expressing and mentally representing their emotions (Taylor, Bagby, & Parker, 2016). They cannot easily relate to others and experience difficulties with interpersonal relationships

(Zackheim, 2007). Their emotional deficits also manifest as a limited capacity for imagination and an increased amount of externally-oriented thinking (Taylor, 2000). Research shows that alexithymia remains stable in people over time, suggesting that it is a consistent individual difference rather than a state-dependent phenomenon (Taylor & Bagby, 2004).

Alexithymia

Early researchers often conceptualized alexithymia as a categorical construct (e.g., Apfel

& Sifneos, 1979). In this vein, early measures of alexithymia were simply intended to dichotomize test-takers into alexithymic and non-alexithymic groups (e.g., Sifneos, 1973).

Although this fits a diagnostic, clinical-oriented point of view, research by Parker et al. (2008) has shown that alexithymia is best conceptualized as a dimensional, rather than categorical, construct. Table 1 contains several definitions of alexithymia in terms of the dimensions that make up the construct. Although there has been debate over the dimensional structure of alexithymia (Lane, Weihs, Herring, Hishaw, & Smith, 2015), it is often conceptualized as EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 3 consisting of three dimensions: difficulty identifying one’s feelings, difficulty describing one’s feelings, and externally-oriented thinking (Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994). Some definitions have also included a dimension of daydreaming (Taylor, Ryan, & Bagby, 1985). Other researchers have operationalized alexithymia using five dimensions (emotionalizing, fantasizing, analyzing, identifying, and verbalizing emotions; Bermond, Vorst, Vingerhoets, & Gerritsen,

1999). These can be collapsed into two higher-order factors of cognitive and affective alexithymia (Bermond et al., 2007). Still others have defined the trait in terms of prototypical descriptions of alexithymic people: distant, uninsightful, somatizing, humorless, and rigid

(Haviland, Warren, & Riggs, 2000). Notably, there is substantial overlap among each of these definitions of alexithymia. Although they have different names and numbers of dimensions, most of these definitions revolve around similar themes relating to a lack of awareness and expression of emotion.

The existence of overlapping definitions of alexithymia requires some clarification of the present study’s definition of the construct. The most common threads among the above definitions are difficulty identifying emotions and difficulty expressing emotions. The present study’s definition of alexithymia will incorporate both of these aspects of alexithymia. In addition, dimensions such as externally-oriented thinking, daydreaming, and fantasizing represent an aspect of alexithymia related to the French idea of la pensée opératoire (Marty & de

M’Uzan, 1963), or “operative thinking,” describing a tendency to think factually rather than symbolically. This idea is part of the construct of alexithymia because a reduction in symbolic thought includes a reduction in thinking about emotions and fantasizing based on feelings. The mental processes of operative thinkers will instead focus on physiological sensations and realistic, observable descriptions of the world. Notably, these ideas are all thought-related EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 4 dimensions of alexithymia. Therefore, a dimension of externally-oriented thinking

(encompassing the concepts of operative thinking, reduced fantasizing, and reduced daydreaming) will also be included in the current definition. This will be added to the dimensions of difficulty identifying emotions and difficulty expressing emotions. Overall, the present study defines alexithymia as a relative inability to think about, identify, and express emotions. This corresponds to the structure described by Bagby, Parker, and Taylor (1994) which is the first definition listed in Table 1.

Although linked to several psychopathologies (e.g., Taylor, Parker, Bagby, & Bourke,

1996; Frewen et al., 2008) and physical health issues (Taylor, 2000), alexithymia exists as a personality trait at a subclinical level (Zackheim, 2007), and has often been studied in healthy populations (e.g., Parker, Taylor, & Bagby, 2001). There is a large body of research examining the correlates and consequences of alexithymia in general populations. Alexithymia is more prevalent in males, older people, those with less education, and those lower in socioeconomic status (Salminen, Saarijärvi, Äärelä, Toikka, & Kauhanen, 1999). Alexithymic personality has been associated with insecure attachment style in relationships (Montebarocci, Codispoti,

Baldaro, & Rossi, 2004) and dissatisfaction with intimate relationships (Humphreys, Wood, &

Parker, 2009). Over several studies, Taylor, Bagby, Ryan, and Parker (1990) documented positive relationships between alexithymia and depression, psychosomatic symptoms, state anxiety, and trait anxiety. They also found negative relationships between alexithymia and need for cognition and anger expression. In three novel experiments, alexithymia was associated with a reduced ability to use cues from the body’s internal state to complete tasks, indicating that impairments associated with alexithymia extend to experiencing difficulties with physical sensations as well as emotional ones (Murphy, Catmur, & Bird, 2018). In a representative study EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 5 of the Finnish population, alexithymia was significantly positively associated with occupational burnout (Mattila et al., 2007). Alexithymia has been shown to strongly negatively relate to emotional intelligence, although a two-factor model consistently fit the data better than a one- factor model in a study of these two constructs (Parker, Taylor, & Bagby, 2001).

Several studies have examined the relationship between alexithymia and the five-factor model of personality traits. The results appear to depend on the operational definition of alexithymia used, (although even results of different studies using the same definition showed some inconsistencies). When alexithymia was defined with four dimensions – difficulty identifying feelings, difficulty describing feelings, externally-oriented thinking, and reduced daydreaming – researchers found that neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experience significantly predicted alexithymia in psychiatric outpatients and significantly predicted extraversion and openness to experience in a healthy control group (Wise, Mann, and Shay,

1992). Zimmerman and colleagues (2005) also found that this definition of alexithymia was negatively related to conscientiousness. Several researchers have studied these relationships using a definition of alexithymia which excluded the daydreaming dimension. When the daydreaming dimension was not included in the construct definition, researchers found that alexithymia correlated positively with neuroticism and negatively with openness to experience

(Bagby, Taylor, & Parker, 1994). Luminet and colleagues (1999) similarly found a positive relationship with neuroticism and a negative relationship with openness, as well as a negative relationship with extraversion when using this definition. Zimmerman and colleagues (2005) found that this definition of alexithymia was positively related to neuroticism and negatively related to extraversion. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 6

Despite the vast body of psychological literature on alexithymia, it has yet to be studied extensively in the organizational sciences. The aforementioned research by Mattila et al. (2007) represents one of few empirical investigations of the construct in a workplace context. The present study relates alexithymia to organizational attitudes and behaviors through the framework of Affective Events Theory (AET).

Affective Events Theory

AET posits that events in the workplace directly cause affective reactions in people

(Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). That is, the situations that people experience at work influence their moods and emotions. Subsequently, these affective experiences shape the attitudes and behaviors of people at work. Affective reactions can directly lead to behaviors or cause behaviors indirectly through job attitudes. Environmental features and individual dispositions also play a role in this model. Aspects of the work environment have a direct effect on both job attitudes and the events encountered at work. Individual dispositions can directly influence the affective reactions people are likely to have across events, as well as the process through which events produce affective reactions in people.

Research has generally supported the theoretical propositions of AET. There are many studies demonstrating that workplace events lead to emotional reactions and subsequent changes in behaviors and attitudes. For example, meta-analytic findings have supported an AET-based model in which the negative event of psychological contract breach results in negative affective reactions which subsequently lead to decreased job satisfaction, job performance, and other important outcomes (Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski, & Bravo, 2007). Similarly, Colquitt and colleagues (2013) provided meta-analytic evidence for the role of affect as a mediator of the relationship between justice perceptions and counterproductive work behaviors (CWB). EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 7

Focusing on a specific type of experience, Carlson and colleagues (2011) showed that enriching work-to-family experiences were related to positive mood which itself was associated with increased job satisfaction and job performance. Using experience-sampling to examine AET processes within people, Ilies, Scott, and Judge (2006) showed that positive emotions experienced during the workday led people to enact organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB).

In another study with a within-person framework, negative affective reactions mediated the relationship between negative work events and counterproductive work behavior (Matta, Erol-

Korkmaz, Johnson, & Biçaksiz, 2014). An application of AET to a sample of managers showed that positive and negative events were associated with positive and negative emotional states which were related to job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Mignonac & Herrbach,

2004). In a large sample of call center employees, Wegge and colleagues (2006) demonstrated that several features of work were associated with positive emotions which predicted job satisfaction. Reich and Hershcovis (2015) found that observing uncivil behavior engendered negative affective reactions toward the instigator, resulting in punishment in the form of allocation of undesirable work to the instigator. It is clear that the main theoretical propositions of AET have found support in many samples and for various types of events and emotions. Some specific areas of research which have often leveraged AET insights include the study of leadership and the study of emotion regulation.

Research on leaders and teamwork has often utilized AET. Pirola-Merlo, Härtel, Mann, and Hirst (2002) applied AET concepts to this framework. They studied the effect of encountering obstacles on team affective climate and of affective climate on subsequent team performance. In addition, they found that leadership behaviors influenced affective climate.

Cole, Walter, and Bruch (2008) found that the negative relationship between dysfunctional team EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 8 behavior and team performance was mediated by negative team affect. Ilies, Wagner, and

Morgeson (2007) further showed that affect can transfer through a team, suggesting that affective events experienced by one team member can indirectly lead to behavioral and attitudinal changes in the rest of the team. Relatedly, Gaddis and colleagues (2004) demonstrated that leaders’ affective displays during feedback influenced subordinate affect, resulting in changes in attitudes about leader effectiveness and changes in task performance. Overall, the behaviors of group members or group leaders clearly can act as affective events which begin the AET process.

AET concepts have also been used extensively in studies on emotion regulation in workers. Affective events and negative emotions can lead workers to employ distinct emotion regulation strategies at work in order to adapt effectively to their environment (Diefendorff,

Richard, & Yang, 2008). Grandey (2000) outlines a model of emotion regulation which shares significant conceptual overlap with AET. In this model, situational cues lead to emotion regulation and emotion regulation leads to long-term consequences such as burnout, performance, and job satisfaction. One situational cue in the model is the experience of emotional events in the workplace. Employees who experience emotional events will regulate their emotions in order to prevent themselves from exhibiting inappropriate behaviors in the workplace. They can do this by modifying their true feelings through cognitive strategies (i.e., deep acting) or by simply altering their behavioral expressions (i.e., surface acting). Thus, the experience of affective events in the workplace can lead to changes in attitudes and behaviors in the form of emotion regulation. In a daily diary study, this model was expanded to explicitly include the mediating role of emotional experiences (Totterdell & Holman, 2003). These researchers found that emotional events involving customers and coworkers led to positive and negative emotions. These emotions predicted emotion regulation motive and the extent of EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 9 surface and deep acting. Gardner, Fischer, and Hunt (2009) leveraged insights from AET to theorize a model of emotional labor in leaders, wherein leaders’ emotional displays in response to affective events can have effects on outcomes for both followers and leaders. The importance of leaders’ emotional display for influencing followers’ emotions, attitudes, and behaviors was similarly emphasized by Ashkanasy and Humphrey (2011).

Due to significant empirical support in the psychological literature, the basic theoretical tenets of AET are expected to be upheld in the present study. That is, it is predicted that work events will be associated with affective reactions, which subsequently will be associated with changes in attitudes and behaviors. Specifically, the following hypotheses are put forth in order to replicate established findings in the literature:

Hypothesis 1: Positive work events will be associated with increased job satisfaction, mediated by positive emotions.

Hypothesis 2: Positive work events will be associated with increased engagement, mediated by positive emotions.

Hypothesis 3: Negative work events will be associated with decreased job satisfaction, mediated by negative emotions.

Hypothesis 4: Negative work events will be associated with decreased engagement, mediated by negative emotions.

Hypothesis 5: Positive work events will be associated with increased OCB, mediated by positive emotions.

Hypothesis 6: Negative work events will be associated with increased CWB, mediated by negative emotions. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 10

The influence of individual dispositions on other AET processes is the most pertinent aspect of the model for alexithymia. If workers cannot accurately identify, describe, and process their emotions, they likely will not display strong affective reactions in response to work events.

Thus, work events are unlikely to result in significant changes in attitudes and behaviors. This creates an opportunity to integrate two areas of psychological research which share similar emotion-related concepts, but have not previously been studied together. AET describes the process through which attitudes and behaviors change as a result of changes in emotions in the workplace. Research on alexithymia has established it as an individual difference variable which affects the extent to which emotions are fully experienced. Combining these two frameworks allows for a unique opportunity to study how alexithymia may inhibit the emotional processes described in AET.

According to the affect regulation model leveraged within AET (Ashkanasy, Ashton-

James, & Jordan, 2004), workers must engage in appraisal and coping processes in order to experience an affective response to an event in the workplace and adjust behaviors and attitudes accordingly. Appraisal consists of two distinct processes – primary and secondary appraisal.

Primary appraisal involves an assessment of whether a workplace event will help or hinder one’s current goals (Ashkanasy & Ashton-James, 2005). This occurs through a comparison of situational demands and the resources one possesses to cope with such demands. This happens involuntary and automatically, requiring no conscious thought or reflection (Scherer, Schorr, &

Johnston, 2001). If primary appraisal determines that the situation requires further attention, the secondary appraisal process will determine the appropriate emotional response. During secondary appraisal, an individual identifies and evaluates the source of the discrepancy between situational demands and possible resources. If carried out accurately, this secondary appraisal EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 11 should generate a discrete positive or negative affective response of appropriate strength.

However, people high in alexithymia will be less likely to appropriately appraise their environment and its cues, thus making it less likely that they will generate the appropriate emotion. In other words, people high in alexithymia may recognize that a situation involves a discrepancy between their resources and the current situation, thus generating a general positive or negative affective state. However, they will lack an appropriate, discrete emotional response to the situation, and thus be unable to identify an emotion beyond general positive or negative arousal.

The coping process consists of the conscious regulation of emotions in order to function adaptively in the work environment after an affective event has occurred – effectively, this determines how attitudes and behaviors may change in response to events (Ashton-James &

Ashkanasy, 2005). Due to the inhibited appraisal process, the coping process is less likely to be successful for alexithymic people. To the extent that emotions can be identified and described, coping may still occur normally. However, the relative inability to identify a specific felt emotion that characterizes alexithymia will limit the effectiveness of coping. Importantly, alexithymic workers may still feel general affective states, but are unable to identify a discrete emotion, thus limiting their ability to cope in appropriate, effective ways. This is perhaps best exemplified by an item from a popular alexithymia measure, “When I am upset, I don’t know if I am sad, frightened, or angry” (Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994). In other words, a general negative or positive state may be experienced, without a discrete emotion to explain it. Thus, alexithymic workers’ behaviors and attitudes at work may remain relatively unchanged even when typically affective events occur. They may feel physiological arousal, but will be unable to identify a specific emotion stemming from it or an effective means of addressing their situation. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 12

Thus, the inhibited appraisal process of alexythmic workers should moderate some of the mechanisms hypothesized in AET. Specifically, affective events should be less likely to be associated with changes in emotions for those higher in alexithymia, thus limiting the amount of changes in work attitudes and work behaviors as a result. This leads to the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 7: Alexithymia will moderate the role of emotions as a mediator of the relationship between work events and work attitudes.

Hypothesis 8: Alexithymia will moderate the role of emotions as a mediator of the relationship between work events and work behaviors.

The present study will also examine the relationship of alexithymia with the five-factor model of personality. It will attempt to address some of the aforementioned discrepancies in the literature regarding the relationship of alexithymia with other personality traits. Furthermore, it will explore the relative incremental validity of alexithymia in predicting important AET and workplace outcomes beyond the five-factor model. Because the emotion-related content of the alexithymia construct makes it distinct from the five-factor model, it is expected to show incremental prediction over these traits. This will demonstrate the utility of alexithymia as a predictor of AET constructs.

Hypothesis 9: Alexithymia will incrementally predict positive emotions over the five- factor model traits.

Hypothesis 10: Alexithymia will incrementally predict negative emotions over the five- factor model traits.

Hypothesis 11: Alexithymia will incrementally predict job satisfaction over the five-factor model traits. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 13

Hypothesis 12: Alexithymia will incrementally predict engagement over the five-factor model traits.

Hypothesis 13: Alexithymia will incrementally predict OCB over the five-factor model traits.

Hypothesis 14: Alexithymia will incrementally predict CWB over the five-factor model traits.

The present study will also examine the role of alexithymia in predicting academic performance. Past research has supported this relationship (Parker et al., 2005), but no research has tested incremental validity of alexithymia over the five-factor model. This leads to the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 15: Alexithymia will incrementally predict academic performance over the five-factor model traits.

The Present Studies

This research will examine the role of alexithymia in organizational processes. It will do this through two studies. Study one will investigate the role of alexithymia in a sample of undergraduate students. The AET processes described previously will be tested in the context of student events and behaviors. The incremental validity of alexithymia in predicting AET-relevant constructs beyond the five-factor model will also be assessed.

Study two will investigate alexithymia within a sample of workers. Alexithymia is expected to moderate the relationship between work events and affect, resulting in changes in work attitudes and behaviors. The incremental validity of alexithymia in predicting work outcomes will be tested. Results will suggest whether alexithymia is a useful individual EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 14 difference for explaining the affective processes determining organizational attitudes and behaviors, as well as its utility for predicting organizational constructs.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 15

METHOD

Study One

Participants and Procedure.

A sample of undergraduate students was collected for study one. Initially, 303 students were recruited from an undergraduate university research pool. Two direct instruction items were administered to participants over the course of the survey (“e.g., “Please indicate ‘Somewhat disagree’ for this item”) to assess insufficient effort responding. Participants’ data was only used if they correctly responded to at least one of these items. After screening for insufficient effort responding in the data, 277 (91.4%) participants’ responses were retained for analyses. The sample was primarily white (85.5%) and female (74.0%). Age ranged from 18 to 34, with a median of 19.0.

Participants were administered measures of positive and negative events, emotions, the five-factor model of personality, alexithymia, attitudes, and behaviors. Participants responded to each of these measures in a random order, followed by demographic items. Measures were administered online at a single timepoint. All measures were tailored to student experiences.

Appendix C contains the complete study materials.

Measures.

Alexithymia. The TAS-20 (Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994) was used to assess alexithymia. This measure includes three dimensions of the construct: difficulty identifying feelings (example item: “I am often confused about what emotion I am feeling”), difficulty describing feelings (example item: “I find it hard to describe how I feel about people”), and externally-oriented thinking (example item: “I prefer talking to people about their daily activities rather than their feelings”). Participants indicated their agreement with each item on a Likert- EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 16 type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Overall scale reliability was good, as Cronbach’s alpha was .85. Reliability of the subscales varied (Identifying Feelings α =

.86, Describing Feelings α = .81, Thinking α = .50).

Five-factor model traits. The five-factor model of personality traits were measured by the Big Five Aspect Scales (BFAS; DeYoung et al., 2007). These scales assess “aspects” of each of the five-factor model traits, providing a conceptual midpoint between specific facets and broad factors. The aspects pertaining to neuroticism (volatility and withdrawal), agreeableness

(compassion and politeness), conscientiousness (industriousness and orderliness), extraversion

(enthusiasm and assertiveness), and openness (intellect and openness) were measured with ten items each. Participants indicated their agreement with each item on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Reliability for each aspect scale was good

(neuroticism α = .88, agreeableness α = .85, conscientiousness α = .86, extraversion α = .86, openness α = .80).

Events. Positive events were assessed using items based on the Uplifts Scale developed by Maybery (2004). This measure was developed to assess relatively minor events in everyday life of university students. Items especially relevant to the student population were used. An example item is “Positive communication with other students.” Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .94. Negative events were assessed using items from the Inventory of College Students’

Recent Life Experiences (Kohn, Lafreniere, & Gurevich, 1990). This scale was developed to measure everyday stressors in college students. An example item is “Lower grades than you hoped for.” Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .96. Participants indicated the frequency of each positive and negative event over the past two weeks on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1

(Never) to 5 (Extremely often). EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 17

Emotions. Positive and negative emotions were assessed using the Job-related Affective

Well-being Scale (JAWS; Van Katwyk, Fox, Spector, & Kelloway, 2000). Item wording was adapted to refer to student life. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they generally have felt several positive (e.g., “my college experience made me feel content”) and negative (e.g., “my college experience made me feel angry”) emotions at work over the past two weeks. Participants indicated how often they experienced each emotion over the past two weeks on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Extremely often). The positive emotions subscale had a Cronbach’s alpha of .92 and the negative emotions subscale had a Cronbach’s alpha of .89.

College satisfaction. College satisfaction was assessed as an attitudinal outcome of affective events. A three-item measure was used in the present study (Cammann, Fichman,

Jenkins, & Klesh, 1983). An example item is “In general, I like my college.” Participants indicated their agreement with each item on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was .87.

College engagement. College engagement was also assessed as an attitudinal outcome.

Three items from Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova (2006) were used. These were also adapted for a college-level frame of reference. An example item is “I am immersed in my coursework.”

Participants indicated their agreement with each item on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1

(Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was .79.

Student counterproductive work behaviors. Student CWB was assessed with items from the Multidimensional Student Performance Scale (MSPS; Cummings, Poropat, Loxton, &

Sheeran, 2017). This measure asks participants to indicate how often they engaged in counterproductive student behaviors (e.g., “lied to get an extension on an assignment”) over the EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 18 past two weeks on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Every day). The Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was .90.

Student organizational citizenship behaviors. Student OCB was assessed with items from the MSPS. This measure asks participants to indicate how frequently they engaged in student citizenship behaviors (e.g., “listened and supported a student who was having personal problems”) over the past two weeks on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Every day). The Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was .86.

Academic performance. Participants were asked to self-report their current GPA to the best of their knowledge.

Study Two

Participants and Procedure.

Participants for study two were recruited through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk).

MTurk is an online service which allows workers to complete tasks (known as Human

Intelligence Tasks, or HITs) in return for monetary compensation. Participants were required to have a HIT acceptance rate of at least 95% on MTurk and to have at least 100 past HITs completed. Only workers from the United States were able to participate. In addition, participants were asked to indicate whether they were currently employed in a non-MTurk job role. If they indicated they currently had no non-MTurk employment, they were screened out of the study.

At time one, 650 participants were recruited. Participants were administered measures of work events, emotions, the five-factor model of personality, and alexithymia. These measures were administered in random order, followed by demographic measures. All time one participants were contacted for participation in time two after two weeks. Only data from EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 19 participants who responded at both time one and time two was retained for analysis. A total of

527 participants responded at time two, for a response rate of 81%. These 527 responses were then screened for insufficient effort responding. Two direct instruction items (“e.g., “Please indicate ‘Somewhat disagree’ for this item”) were administered to participants over the course of the time one survey and one such item was administered during the time two survey.

Participants’ data was only used if they responded correctly to all three items. After this procedure, 465 participants’ data were retained, or about 72% of the original time one sample.

Participants were administered measures of work attitudes and work behaviors at time two.

These measures were administered in random order. Appendix D contains the complete study materials for each time.

The sample was primarily white (74.2%) and male (54.2%). Age ranged from 20 to 71, with a median of 35.0. Participants were varied in education level, with 64% reporting they hold at least a 4-year college degree. Most participants (62.2%) reported working 24-40 hours per week at their job and a plurality of participants (28.2%) reported working in an organization with

500 or more members. The most commonly reported industry was “Finance or insurance”

(14.2%), followed by “Educational services” (11.4%) and “Health care or social assistance”

(11.4%).

Measures.

Five-factor model traits. The five-factor model of personality was assessed using the mini-IPIP (Donnellan, Oswald, Baird, & Lucas, 2006). These scales were developed to measure each of the Big Five personality traits in a shortened format. Each trait (neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness) was measured with four items, for a total of twenty items for all measures combined. Participants indicated their agreement with EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 20 each item on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree).

Cronbach’s alpha for these measures was acceptable (neuroticism α = .78, agreeableness α = .79, conscientiousness α = .73, extraversion α = .82, openness α = .75).

Work events. Positive and negative work events were assessed with the measure used by

Bono, Glomb, Shen, Kim, & Koch (2013). Participants were asked to indicate whether they experienced four positive (e.g., “received positive feedback or praise”) and seven negative (e.g.,

“got treated disrespectfully”) work events during the past week on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Extremely often). Cronbach’s alpha was .73 for the positive events scale and

.85 for the negative events scale.

Emotions. Positive and negative emotions were assessed using the Job-related Affective

Well-being Scale (JAWS; Van Katwyk, Fox, Spector, & Kelloway, 2000). Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they generally had felt several positive (e.g., “my job made me feel content”) and negative (e.g., “my job made me feel angry”) emotions at work over the past week on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Extremely often). Cronbach’s alpha was .94 for the positive emotions scale and .91 for the negative emotions scale.

Alexithymia. The TAS-20 (Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994) was used to assess alexithymia in study two as well. Participants indicated their agreement with each item on a

Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). The reliability of the overall scale was .89. As in study one, reliability of the subscales varied (Identifying Feelings α

= .90, Describing Feelings α = .83, Thinking α = .60).

Job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was assessed as an attitudinal outcome of affective events. A three-item measure was used in the present study (Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, &

Klesh, 1983). An example item is “In general, I like my job.” Participants indicated their EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 21 agreement with each item on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5

(Strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was .94.

Engagement. Engagement was also assessed as an attitudinal outcome. Three items from

Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova (2006) were used. An example item is “I am immersed in my work.” Participants indicated their agreement with each item on a Likert-type scale ranging from

1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was .88.

Counterproductive work behaviors. CWB was assessed using the 32-item

Counterproductive Work Behavior Checklist (Spector et al., 2006). Participants were asked whether they had engaged in several deviant behaviors (e.g., “stolen something belonging to your employer”) over the past two weeks on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5

(Every day). Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was .98.

Organizational citizenship behaviors. OCB was assessed using the 20-item

Organizational Citizenship Behavior Checklist (Fox, Spector, Goh, Bruursema, & Kessler,

2012). Participants were asked whether they had engaged in several helpful behaviors (e.g.,

“volunteered for extra work assignments”) over the past two weeks on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Every day). Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was .94.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 22

RESULTS Correlations, means, and standard deviations for all variables of interest can be found in

Table 2 (for the student sample) and Table 3 (for the MTurk sample). The means and standard deviations of alexithymia in the two samples here are similar to those found in a past study of a large community sample (Parker, Taylor, & Bagby, 2003). A summary of results of the hypothesis tests for both samples can be found in Table 4. Hypotheses 1 through 8 were tested using Mplus (Muthén & Muthén, 2015). Hypotheses 9 through 15 were tested using SPSS (IBM

Corp., 2012).

Although the first eight hypotheses in this study refer to mediation, the methodology of the present study prohibits the establishment of causality among variables, which is required to demonstrate true mediation (Kline, 2015). It is acknowledged that the effects studied here are not necessarily indicative of causal processes. However, for simplicity of interpretation, they will continue to be referred to as mediation effects to align with common nomenclature for analyses and statistical indices of indirect effects in organizational psychology (e.g., Hayes, 2015).

Hypotheses 1 through 6 tested whether the theoretical predictions of AET were upheld in the present studies. Specifically, they assessed whether positive events led to positive outcomes, mediated by positive emotions and whether negative events led to negative outcomes, mediated by negative emotions. Each hypothesis was tested twice – once with the sample of students from study one and again with the sample of MTurk workers from study two. In both tests, the indirect effect of positive or negative events on the dependent variable of interest was calculated using bias-corrected bootstrapping. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test for these effects in the sample of MTurk workers. Due to a limited sample size leading to issues with SEM model convergence, path analysis was used for the student sample. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 23

Hypothesis 1 suggested that positive events resulted in increased job satisfaction, mediated by positive emotions. This hypothesis was supported in the student sample from study one. The model in Figure 1 was specified with job satisfaction as the outcome variable. The indirect effect of positive events on job satisfaction was tested for significance using bias- corrected bootstrapping. This resulted in a 95% confidence interval (CI) which did not include zero, ab = .37 [.27, .48], indicating a significant indirect effect. In addition, the CI for the direct effect of positive events on job satisfaction included zero, c’ = .05 [-.11, .20], indicating support for full mediation of this relationship through positive emotions.

This hypothesis was also supported in the MTurk sample from study two. Structural equation modeling was used for this sample to assess relationships among latent constructs. First, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model was specified to assess whether the measurement model fits the data. This model included all variables of interest for hypotheses 1 through 8 and is shown in Figure 2. The measurement model displayed good fit to the data (χ2(341) = 804.34, p

< .001; CFI = .96; RMSEA = .05; SRMR = .06; AIC = 23,280.96) and all indicators loaded strongly onto their specified factors (the lowest factor loading was .50). Overall, the model fit statistics and factor loadings suggest that the specification of latent variables by the indicators used is appropriate.

Next, the hypothesized mediation effect for hypothesis 1 was tested for the MTurk sample. This model also corresponded to Figure 1, with the exception that latent constructs were specified and used in an SEM model rather than a path analysis model. The indirect effect of positive events on job satisfaction through positive emotions was significant, ab = 1.23 [.82,

1.77]. The direct effect of positive events on job satisfaction was not significant, c’ = .04 [-.40, EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 24

.51], indicating full mediation. The overall fit for this model was also good (χ2(32) = 85.22, p <

.001; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .06; SRMR = .03; AIC = 9,807.82).

Hypothesis 2 proposed that positive events resulted in increased engagement, mediated by positive emotions. This hypothesis was supported in the student sample. The same path analysis model and procedure described previously was used for this test, with the exception that engagement was specified as the outcome rather than job satisfaction. The 95% CI for the indirect effect excluded zero, ab = .29 [.19, .40]. The CI for the direct effect of positive events on engagement also excluded zero, c’ = .29 [.13, .46], indicating that positive emotions is a partial mediator of this relationship.

Hypothesis 2 was also supported in the MTurk sample. The same procedure used to test hypothesis 1 in the MTurk sample was also used here, with engagement replacing job satisfaction as the dependent variable. The indirect effect was significant, ab = 1.09 [.74, 1.54].

The direct effect of positive events on engagement was not significant, c’ = .10 [-.28, .49], indicating full mediation in this sample. The overall fit for this model was good (χ2(32) = 82.70, p < .001; CFI = .98; RMSEA = .06; SRMR = .03; AIC = 10,297.54).

Hypotheses 3 and 4 proposed that negative events would be associated with decreases in satisfaction and engagement, respectively, mediated by negative emotions. In the student sample, this was tested by specifying a path analytic model corresponding to Figure 3. Hypothesis 3 was supported, ab = -.29 [-.46, -.14]. Additionally, the direct path of negative events on satisfaction was significant, c’ = -.25 [-.45, -.05], indicating that negative emotions partially mediate this relationship. Hypothesis 4 was not supported in this sample, ab = -.10 [-.24, .02].

In the MTurk sample, hypothesis 3 was supported, ab = -.69 [-.96, -.47]. The direct effect of negative events on satisfaction was not significant, c’ = .27 [.00, .57], supporting full EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 25 mediation of this relationship. This model also had good fit (χ2(17) = 67.93, p < .001; CFI = .98;

RMSEA = .08, SRMR = .04; AIC = 7,048.09). Hypothesis 4 was also supported, ab = -.55 [-.79,

-.37]. The direct effect of negative events on engagement was not significant, c’ = .15 [-.07, .41], indicating full mediation. The overall model fit was good (χ2(17) = 59.70, p < .001; CFI = .98;

RMSEA = .07; SRMR = .03; AIC = 7,577.08).

Hypothesis 5 predicted that positive events would be associated with a higher frequency of OCB, mediated by positive emotions. In the student sample, this hypothesis was supported, ab

= .09 [.03 .18]. The direct effect of positive events on OCB was also significant, c’ = .28 [.13

.41], indicating partial mediation. However, hypothesis 5 was not supported in the MTurk sample, ab = .06 [-.30, .35], although overall model fit was good (χ2(32) = 103.33, p < .001; CFI

= .98; RMSEA = .07; SRMR = .04; AIC = 9,359.16).

Hypothesis 6 predicted that negative events would be associated with a higher frequency of CWB. In the student sample, this hypothesis was not supported, ab = .01 [-.03, .05]. Similarly, this hypothesis was not supported in the MTurk sample, ab = .00 [-.11, .10], although overall model fit was good (χ2(32) = 134.85, p < .001; CFI = .98; RMSEA = .08; SRMR = .04; AIC =

6,136.79).

Hypotheses 7 and 8 predicted that alexithymia would have a moderating effect on the mediating role of emotions. Hypothesis 7 examined this effect for attitudinal dependent variables

(job satisfaction and engagement) and hypothesis 8 focused on behavioral variables (OCB and

CWB). Each hypothesis was tested in both samples. As before, path analysis was used to test the hypotheses in the student sample. Specifically, an index of moderated mediation was conducted according to the procedure outlined by Hayes (2015). Bias-corrected bootstrapping was used to create a 95% CI to test for statistical significance. SEM was used to test these hypotheses in the EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 26

MTurk sample. Specifically, the latent moderated structural equation (LMS) approach presented by Klein and Moosbrügger (2000) was used to specify a latent interaction term. This method allows for estimation of a moderation effect without creating a latent term based on products of indicator variables. This effect can be tested for significance as a z-statistic. In addition, the AIC of the latent interaction model can be compared to that of a baseline model which has no interaction term. The LMS method is advantageous because latent interaction effects defined by the products of indicators involve making distributional assumptions which are typically not met in practice (Sardeshmukh & Vandenberg, 2017). The LMS approach does not require these assumptions. In comparative studies, the LMS approach has been shown to outperform other methods for assessing latent interactions (e.g., Marsh, Wen, & Hau, 2004; Jackman, Leite, &

Cochrane, 2011; Klein & Moosbrügger, 2000), suggesting that it is appropriate for the present analysis.

Each moderated mediation hypothesis involved specifying a model such as the one shown in Figure 4 (for negative emotions) or Figure 5 (for positive emotions). First, hypothesis 7 was tested by assessing whether alexithymia moderated the mediating effect of negative emotions on the relationship between negative events and job satisfaction. Specifically, it was predicted that alexithymia would weaken the mediating effect of negative emotions. This hypothesis was not supported in the student sample, B = .07 [-.06, .19], or in the MTurk sample,

B = -.09, z = -1.56, p = .120. The latent interaction model had slightly worse fit (AIC =

10,203.63) than the baseline model (10,202.40). Next, the same models were specified with engagement as the dependent variable instead of job satisfaction. Again, the effect was not significant in the student sample, B = .02 [-.01, .10], or in the MTurk sample, B = -.08, z = -1.52, EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 27 p = .128. The latent interaction model also had slightly worse fit (AIC = 10,203.64) than the baseline model (AIC = 10,202.40).

Next, hypothesis 7 was tested by assessing the role of alexithymia as a moderator of the mediating role of positive emotions on the relationship between positive events and attitudinal outcomes. This effect was significant for job satisfaction in the student sample, B = -.13 [-.28,

.00] 1, but was not significant in the MTurk sample, B = -.08, z = -.95, p = .341. This shows some support for a moderated mediation effect, as positive emotions significantly mediated the relationship between positive events and job satisfaction in the student sample. The latent interaction model fit (AIC = 12,615.81) was slightly worse than the baseline model fit (AIC =

12,614.15). The effect was significant for engagement in the student sample, B = -.10 [-.23, -.01], although the CI was close to zero. This shows some support for a moderated mediation effect, as positive emotions significantly mediated the relationship between positive events and engagement in this sample. The effect was not significant in the MTurk sample, B = -.08, z = -

.92, p = .358. The latent interaction model fit (AIC = 13,104.82) was slightly worse than the baseline model fit (AIC = 13,103.08). Overall, hypothesis 7 received some support in the student sample.

Hypothesis 8 predicted that alexithymia would moderate the role of emotions as a mediator of the relationship between events and behaviors. First, moderation of the role of negative emotions as a mediator between negative events and CWB was examined. This effect was not significant in the student sample, B = .00 [-.02, .00]. This effect was significant in the

MTurk sample, B = -.12, z = -2.14, p = .032. The latent interaction model fit (AIC = 8,731.52) was slightly better than that of the baseline model (AIC = 8,732.77). This suggests that, in those

1 For reporting purposes, the upper bound of this CI is rounded to .00; however, the actual value is -.004. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 28 high in alexithymia, negative emotions may be less likely to be experienced as a result of negative events. However, this only represents an instance of moderation, not moderated mediation, because the effect of negative events on CWB was not mediated by negative emotions in this model.

Next, moderation of the role of positive emotions as a mediator between positive events and OCB was tested. This effect was significant in the student sample, B = -.03 [-.11, .00]2. This shows some support for moderated mediation, as mediation of the relationship between positive events and OCB was also supported in this sample. This effect was not significant in the MTurk sample, B = -.07, z = -.81, p = .419. Overall, there was partial support for moderation of the mediation between positive events and OCB.

Hypotheses 9 through 15 proposed that alexithymia would incrementally predict variance in outcomes of interest over the five-factor model of personality. These hypotheses were tested in both samples, except for hypothesis 15 which was only tested in the student sample. Each hypothesis was tested through hierarchical linear regression. In step one, all personality traits in the five-factor model were entered as predictors of the dependent variable of interest. In step two, alexithymia was entered as a predictor and the incremental variance explained was examined for significance.

Hypotheses 9 and 10 predicted that alexithymia would incrementally predict variance in positive emotions and negative emotions, respectively. Hypothesis 9 was not supported in the student sample, ΔR2 = .00, F(1,270) = 1.03, p = .310. However, it was supported in the MTurk sample, ΔR2 = .02, F(1, 458) = 9.58, p = .002. This suggests that alexithymia added incremental prediction to positive emotions in the MTurk sample, but not the student sample. Hypothesis 10

2 For reporting purposes, the upper bound of this CI is rounded to .00; however, the actual value is -.002. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 29 was supported in the student sample, ΔR2 = .03, F(1, 270) = 11.17, p = .001, and in the MTurk sample, ΔR2 = .02, F(1, 458) = 16.12, p = .002. This indicates that alexithymia is a useful predictor of negative emotions.

Hypotheses 11 and 12 proposed that alexithymia would incrementally predict variance in job satisfaction and engagement, respectively. Alexithymia did not incrementally predict variance in job satisfaction for the student sample, ΔR2 = .00, F(1, 270) = .90 , p = .344, or for the MTurk sample, ΔR2 = .01, F(1, 458) = 2.30, p = .085. Similarly, alexithymia did not incrementally predict variance in engagement for the student sample, ΔR2 = .00, F(1, 270) = .21, p = .647, or for the MTurk sample, , ΔR2 = .00, F(1, 458) = 2.58, p = .109. Thus, hypotheses 11 and 12 were not supported in either sample.

Hypotheses 13 and 14 predicted that alexithymia would incrementally predict variance in

OCB and CWB, respectively. Hypothesis 13 was supported in the student sample, ΔR2 = .04,

F(1, 270) = 12.35, p = .001, and in the MTurk sample, ΔR2 = .03, F(1, 457) = 13.84, p < .001.

Thus, alexithymia appears to be a useful predictor of OCB. Hypothesis 14 was not supported in the student sample, ΔR2 = .01, F(1, 270) = 2.06, p = .152. Hypothesis 14 was supported in the

MTurk sample, ΔR2 = .06, F(1, 458) = 35.16, p < .001. Alexithymia incrementally predicted

CWB in the MTurk sample, but not in the student sample.

Hypothesis 15 predicted that alexithymia would incrementally predict variance in the academic performance of students. This was not supported, as alexithymia did not significantly improve prediction of students’ GPA, ΔR2 = .00, F(1, 262) = .05, p = .821.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 30

DISCUSSION

The goals of the present studies were primarily to examine whether alexithymia moderated AET processes in two separate samples and to test whether alexithymia is a useful predictor of workplace outcomes above and beyond the five-factor model of personality. The results of hypothesis testing were somewhat mixed. Alexithymia appears to have an influence on certain psychological processes and outcomes. However, more research is needed to discover how organizational psychologists can best leverage this construct for improved understanding and prediction of workplace phenomena.

Mediation and Moderation

Based on AET, it was expected that positive and negative emotions would mediate the relationship between events and subsequent attitudes and behaviors. This was largely supported for the attitudinal outcomes of job satisfaction and engagement. Only the mediation of the path between negative events and engagement in the student sample was not significant. Since full mediation was supported for this path in the MTurk sample, this may be due in part to lower statistical power resulting from a smaller sample size in the student sample. It is also possible that qualitative differences between the samples themselves may partially account for the discrepancies in findings. Perhaps students are better able to maintain engagement in their studies in the face of negative events than employees are at their place of work. Relatedly, the measure used in this study to capture student engagement specifically referred to their engagement with coursework, which may remain largely unaffected by negative college experiences which do not take place in the academic domain (e.g., social or financial events).

Even with this nonsignificant finding, there was strong support for AET processes resulting in changes in attitudes in the present studies. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 31

Unexpectedly, limited support was found for emotions as a mediator of the relationships between events and behavioral outcomes. There are several possible explanations for this result.

First, it could be that the hypothesized changes in OCB and CWB are not as likely to occur directly as a result of emotions. AET states that behaviors may either be the direct result of emotions or a consequence of attitude changes which are themselves the result of emotions

(Ashkanasy & Ashton-James, 2005). The mediation hypothesized in the present studies tested for the former of these processes. Therefore, the nonsignificant findings may suggest that OCB and

CWB are not often purely the result of emotions. In addition, such emotion-driven behaviors would include spontaneous behaviors which presumably would be performed very soon after an emotion is felt. Such behaviors would be difficult to detect in the present study given the two- week time lag between the collection of emotion data and behavioral outcomes. If spontaneous behaviors make up a significant portion of OCB and CWB, different methods would be needed to accurately assess whether AET processes are occurring. Future research using methods such as experience sampling could be effective in this regard. Using such methods, researchers could ask participants to assess their behavior and attitudes immediately after a positive or negative event, allowing for a more accurate assessment of emotional processes.

Due to a finding of nonsignificant mediation, the significant moderation effect found for the relationship between negative events and CWB in the MTurk sample does not indicate moderated mediation. That is, although alexithymia did in fact appear to moderate the relationship between negative events and negative emotions in this model, negative emotions themselves were not significantly related to CWB. Thus, although alexithymia may play a role in the negative emotional processes hypothesized through AET, it does not seem to affect the extent to which attitudes or behaviors change as a result of those negative emotions. Further research on EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 32 an expanded range of workplace outcomes may serve to clarify if or when alexithymia affects attitudes and behaviors by influencing negative emotions. For example, constructs such as task performance and organizational justice were not tested in the present studies, but are valuable organizational outcomes which may be affected by alexithymia. In the present studies, the finding of significant moderation of the relationship between negative events and negative emotions demonstrates that alexithymia can influence how employees experience the workplace, a result which itself has implications for future research and practice.

If alexithymia sometimes moderates the relationship between negative events and negative emotions, then employees high in alexithymia may not always react to workplace events in expected ways. Specifically, the present studies suggest that alexithymic employees may sometimes be less likely to experience negative emotions in the face of negative events.

Unpleasant interpersonal interactions, negative feedback, and task difficulties may be less emotional incidents for such employees. In some cases, this could be disadvantageous for employees who may insufficiently change their behaviors or attitudes to match the demands they face. For example, an employee who does not feel frustration when a boss or coworker is wasting his or her time may not take appropriate action to rectify the situation. However, this also means that such employees may be less emotional and more rational in the face of setbacks, which could prove beneficial for good decision-making. For example, alexithymic employees may behave more constructively in the face of negative feedback if they are less likely to experience negative emotions when it occurs. Future research may be able to identify situations in which this moderation effect may occur and what consequences there may be for such employees. AET will likely continue to be a useful framework moving forward, as it appears that alexithymia may moderate some AET processes. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 33

From an organizational perspective, supervisors should be aware that some of their employees may not easily feel or display specific negative emotions in the face of difficulties.

This does not mean that they are not experiencing negative situations or difficulties, but rather they may lack the capacity to identify or express the specific emotions they are feeling. As mentioned, this could impair their ability to effectively deal with demands they face. Employees high in alexithymia may also be more likely to communicate about problems in more practical terms than emotional ones.

Lastly, some support was found for moderation of the relationship between positive events and positive emotions, resulting in changes in satisfaction, engagement, and OCB in the student sample. Specifically, students high in alexithymia appear to be less likely to be satisfied with and engaged in coursework, as well as less likely to enact OCB after positive events. These students may be less likely to feel positive emotions as a result of those events. These effects were not found in the MTurk sample, which may indicate that alexithymia is more likely to affect emotional responses to events at college than events at work. However, this could also be because the MTurk sample was older and more educated than the student sample. Perhaps people high in alexithymia learn to limit the influence of alexithymia on their emotions as they get older or acquire more education. Future researchers may consider conducting similar analyses on a sample of younger employees who are not in college in order to isolate the reasons behind these disparate findings.

Although the sizes of these moderated mediation effects were small, they were still statistically significant and provide some insights into the utility of alexithymia. Alexithymia may be useful for future researchers interested in studying student populations and modeling the emotional processes which students experience. Future studies exploring alexithymia and AET EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 34 should examine whether the effects found here in the student sample are also detected in more traditional, offline organizational samples. Overall, although there was only limited support found for moderated mediation, the present studies show that alexithymia is a useful individual difference for predicting outcomes within the AET framework and that it does moderate the emotional mediation processes outlined in AET under some circumstances.

Prediction of Workplace Outcomes

The findings of the present studies have other implications for organizations as well; specifically, the results of hypotheses 9 through 14 suggest that alexithymia is a useful predictor of workplace outcomes even after accounting for the five-factor model of personality.

Personality measures are often used in employee selection, and there is now evidence that alexithymia may be useful for this purpose. For example, alexithymia appears to be very useful when predicting contextual performance, as it added substantial variance explained in CWB and

OCB for the MTurk sample, as well as significant improvement in prediction of OCB for the student sample. Further post-hoc investigation of the MTurk sample reveals that one of the alexithymia subscales, Identifying Emotions, accounts for a considerable portion of the variance explained in CWB and OCB. After predicting CWB with the five-factor model of personality in step one, adding the Identifying Emotions subscale in step two results in a substantial increase in prediction, ΔR2 = .11, F(1, 458) = 76.39, p < .001. A similar process results in substantial predictive gains for OCB, ΔR2 = .05, F(1, 457) = 27.16, p < .001. Researchers and practitioners interested in predicting contextual performance should consider focusing on the Identifying subscale of alexithymia. This suggests that identification of emotions is probably more important to behavioral prediction than thinking about or describing emotions. Another interesting aspect of this finding is that identification of emotions is positively associated with both CWB and EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 35

OCB. Perhaps employees who have difficulty identifying emotions they are feeling are more prone to engaging in contextual behaviors in general. That is, employees struggling to complete the secondary appraisal process of identifying a discrete, emotional response to a situation may resort to behavioral methods of trying to convey what they are feeling. In such employees, a generalized, vague feeling of positive or negative affect may be likely to manifest in OCB or

CWB, respectively. Another possibility is that such employees are likely to engage in OCB to

“make up” for CWB which occurs as a result of the inability to identify emotions. Future research should continue to examine the different subscales of alexithymia to understand how they may differentially predict behaviors.

In addition to contextual performance, alexithymia significantly improved prediction of positive and negative emotions in the MTurk sample, as well as prediction of negative emotions in the student sample. Although perhaps not as central to organizational psychology as performance constructs, employee emotions remain an important outcome for both scientists and practitioners. Including alexithymia as a predictor in studies of emotion can help researchers better understand what individual differences account for variance in these outcomes.

Lastly, the present studies provide evidence of the correlations between alexithymia and each of the five-factor model traits. Specifically, alexithymia was significantly negatively correlated with conscientiousness, extraversion, openness, and agreeableness in both studies. It was significantly positively correlated with neuroticism in both studies as well. These results are similar to past research by Luminet et al. (1999) and Zimmerman et al. (2005), with the exception that those authors did not find a significant correlation between alexithymia and agreeableness. The results of the present studies suggest that alexithymia is related to each trait EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 36 in the five-factor model, although additional research should work toward establishing an estimate of the meta-analytic relationship between alexithymia and other personality traits.

Alexithymia and Emotions

An interesting finding is that alexithymia itself seems to be highly positively correlated with the experience of negative emotions and significantly negatively correlated with the experience of positive emotions (see Tables 2 and 3). This somewhat counterintuitive finding is likely due to a few different influences. First, it is important to remember that those high in subclinical alexithymia are not incapable of experiencing emotions – they are just less likely to identify, describe, and think about emotions than others. Thus, it is still possible for people who are relatively high in alexithymia to experience emotions. Additionally, although the construct itself is centered around the relative inability to experience emotions, it is possible that the experience of alexithymia itself may be conducive to more negative emotions and fewer positive emotions. Perhaps an inability to effectively experience emotions results in enough generalized anxiety and negative affect for high-alexithymia people to be able to self-report that they are in fact feeling negative emotions. Lastly, alexithymic people appear to be more likely to engage in

CWB, less likely to enjoy their jobs, and less likely to be engaged in their work. These experiences may make them more likely to encounter negative events such as unhappy bosses or coworkers. Thus, the sheer quantity of negative events experienced may make negative emotions more likely to be experienced than positive emotions.

In addition to these possible explanations, the measurement of alexithymia itself may partially explain the unexpected correlations with emotions. The wording of items in the alexithymia measure used in the present studies is one area which future research could address.

Some items explicitly refer to negative emotions (e.g., “When I am upset, I don’t know if I am EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 37 sad, frightened, or angry,” “I often don’t know why I am angry”), whereas none explicitly refer to positive emotions. These items may prime participants to be more likely to endorse later survey items assessing the frequency of negative emotions experienced at work, which could lead to artificially inflated correlations between negative emotions and alexithymia. Perhaps balancing these items with others which refer to the inability to experience positive emotions would limit the correlation between alexithymia and negative emotions.

Items focused on positive emotions could also have the benefit of more content valid measurement of alexithymia because the construct definition refers to a relative inability to identify, describe, and think about all emotions, not just negative ones. Thus, adding items which describe positive emotions may result in more comprehensive coverage of the construct domain.

Additional items which do not refer to any specific type of emotion may also be useful. Adding positive or neutral items could also help to ensure that the measurement of alexithymia is not capturing unwanted variance in depression, a distinct construct that is often linked to alexithymia in clinical samples (Marchesi, Brusamonti, & Maggini, 2000). Related to psychometric concerns regarding the measurement of alexithymia, it is worth noting that the Thinking subscale seems to be fairly unreliable based on the results of the student sample (α = .50) and the MTurk sample (α

= .60). This represents another area where construct measurement may be improved. Future research should continue to examine whether the psychometric characteristics of this alexithymia measure can be improved by adding items or altering the wording of existing items.

Limitations

There are limitations inherent to the methods used in the present studies. One important aspect of this research, which represents both a strength and a limitation, was that two separate samples were used to test the same hypotheses. In some cases, hypotheses were uniformly EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 38 supported or not supported. However, several hypotheses received support in one sample and not the other one, which limits the extent to which definitive conclusions can be drawn about some of the phenomena of interest. It could be that the two populations drawn from (undergraduate students and MTurk workers) are different enough from each other that different results are found for the same research questions. It may be the case that the experiences of students at college and the experiences of employees in an organization are not both able to be accurately modeled through AET processes.

The use of MTurk to collect a sample of employees may carry some inherent limitations.

Although research has suggested that MTurk participants tend to behave similarly to those from other sources (Mason & Suri, 2012), some differences between MTurk workers and other participants have also been identified. For example, MTurk participants tend to be disproportionately young, female, and have relatively high income (Harms & DeSimone, 2015).

MTurk participants may also be susceptible to distractions and likely to engage in multitasking

(Nesnidol et al., 2018), which could limit their ability to attend closely and answer truthfully and accurately. Although attention checks were used in the present study to limit this influence, it would still be beneficial to examine alexithymia and AET processes in other samples. To the extent to which MTurk workers differ from more traditional organizational samples, different results may occur.

Some of the discrepant findings between the two studies may also be due to the procedures used to test these hypotheses. Path analysis was used to analyze data from the student sample, whereas the MTurk sample provided enough observations for SEM methods. An advantage of SEM is its ability to model error and assess relationships among latent constructs

(Kline, 2015). Path analysis does not benefit from this latent modeling, so measurement error EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 39 may account for some of the differences between samples. Future work in alexithymia can use these studies as a starting point for studying alexithymia in student or employee populations, but researchers should be prepared for the possibility of findings differing depending on the population and methodology used.

Another potential limitation was the two-week time lag between collection of data on emotions and the collection of data on outcomes. This necessarily prohibits the measurement of spontaneous or otherwise emotion-driven behaviors which may occur immediately or soon after emotions are experienced. It is possible that a shorter time lag would result in a stronger test of the hypotheses for those types of behaviors. As mentioned previously, future research which leverages experience sampling technology may be a useful avenue for examining alexithymia and AET processes with minimal time between predictor and criteria measurement. In the present study, the two-week time lag leads to the possibility of participants forgetting or distorting their memories. On the other hand, this two-week lag conveys the benefit of limiting the extent to which common method variance affects the relationships of interest (Podsakoff,

MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). Future studies should carefully consider the benefits and drawbacks of various time lags and interpret results within the context of the time taken between measurement of predictor and criteria constructs.

Conclusions

The results of the present studies suggest that alexithymia is a useful personality trait for predicting outcomes in organizational psychology. However, more work is needed to establish how alexithymia can be integrated with existing organizational theories. Although some support was found for the integration of alexithymia with AET, there was little evidence of moderated mediation occurring because of alexithymia. Furthermore, significant moderated mediation EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 40 effects were only found in the sample of college students, not in the sample of employees. Thus, alexithymia may be useful in explaining AET processes for college students, but this may not be the case for employee samples. Further research using student and organizational samples should build upon the results found here and examine whether alexithymia should be studied within the framework of AET. Lastly, hierarchical regression revealed the utility of alexithymia in the prediction of organizational outcomes of interest, particularly with regard to contextual performance constructs. The Identifying Emotions subscale was especially useful when predicting these outcomes. Future research should continue to examine the utility and feasibility of alexithymia as a selection tool in organizations. Overall, alexithymia appears to be a useful construct for organizational psychology and should be considered as a potential predictor in research on personality and emotions.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 41

REFERENCES

Alarcon, G., Eschleman, K. J., & Bowling, N. A. (2009). Relationships between personality

variables and burnout: A meta-analysis. Work & stress, 23(3), 244-263.

Apfel, R. J., & Sifneos, P. E. (1979). Alexithymia: Concept and measurement. Psychotherapy

and psychosomatics, 32(1-4), 180-190.

Ashkanasy, N. M., & Ashton-James, C. E. (2005). Emotion in organizations: A neglected topic

in I/O psychology, but with a bright future. International review of industrial and

organizational psychology, 20(6), 221-268.

Ashkanasy, N. M., Ashton-James, C. E., & Jordan, P. J. (2004). Performance impacts of

appraisal and coping with stress in workplace settings. In: P. Perrewé & D. Ganster (Eds),

Research in organizational behavior (pp. 1–44). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.

Ashkanasy, N. M., & Humphrey, R. H. (2011). A multi-level view of leadership and emotions:

Leading with emotional labor. Sage handbook of leadership (363-377). Thousand Oaks,

CA: SAGE Publications.

Ashton, M. C. (1998). Personality and job performance: The importance of narrow traits. Journal

of organizational behavior, 19(3), 289-303.

Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2005). Honesty‐Humility, the Big Five, and the Five‐Factor Model.

Journal of personality, 73(5), 1321-1354.

Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & De Vries, R. E. (2014). The HEXACO Honesty-Humility,

Agreeableness, and Emotionality factors: A review of research and theory. Personality

and Social Psychology Review, 18(2), 139-152. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 42

Ashton-James, C. E., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2005). What lies beneath? A process analysis of

affective events theory. In Research on emotions in organizations (pp. 23-50). Oxford,

UK: Elsevier.

Bagby, R. M., Parker, J. D., & Taylor, G. J. (1994). The twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia

Scale—I. Item selection and cross-validation of the factor structure. Journal of

psychosomatic research, 38(1), 23-32.

Bagby, R. M., Taylor, G. J., & Parker, J. D. (1994). The twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia

Scale—II. Convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity. Journal of psychosomatic

research, 38(1), 33-40.

Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job

performance: a meta‐analysis. Personnel psychology, 44(1), 1-26.

Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. (2000). Select on conscientiousness and emotional stability. In

Handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp. 19-39). West Sussex, United

Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. (2005). Yes, personality matters: Moving on to more important

matters. Human performance, 18(4), 359-372.

Bateman, T. S., & Crant, J. M. (1993). The proactive component of organizational behavior: A

measure and correlates. Journal of organizational behavior, 14(2), 103-118.

Bermond, B., Clayton, K., Liberova, A., Luminet, O., Maruszewski, T., Ricci Bitti, P. E., Rimé,

B., Vorst, H. H., Wagner, H., & Wicherts, J. (2007). A cognitive and an affective

dimension of alexithymia in six languages and seven populations. Cognition and

Emotion, 21(5), 1125-1136. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 43

Bermond, B., Vorst, H. C., Vingerhoets, A. J., & Gerritsen, W. (1999). The Amsterdam

Alexithymia Scale: its psychometric values and correlations with other personality traits.

Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 68(5), 241-251.

Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description.

Psychological bulletin, 117(2), 187-215.

Bono, J. E., Glomb, T. M., Shen, W., Kim, E., & Koch, A. J. (2013). Building positive resources:

Effects of positive events and positive reflection on work stress and health. Academy of

Management Journal, 56(6), 1601-1627.

Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional

leadership: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 89(5), 901-910.

Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins G.D., & Klesh J.R. (1983). Assessing the attitudes and

perceptions of organizational members. In S. E. Seashore, E. Lawler, P. H. Mirvis, & C.

Cammann (Eds.), Assessing Organizational Change (pp. 71-138). New York: John Wiley

& Sons.

Carlson, D., Kacmar, K. M., Zivnuska, S., Ferguson, M., & Whitten, D. (2011). Work-family

enrichment and job performance: A constructive replication of affective events theory.

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(3), 297-312.

Christian, M. S., Bradley, J. C., Wallace, J. C., & Burke, M. J. (2009). Workplace safety: a meta-

analysis of the roles of person and situation factors. Journal of applied psychology, 94(5),

1103-1127.

Cole, M. S., Walter, F., & Bruch, H. (2008). Affective mechanisms linking dysfunctional

behavior to performance in work teams: A moderated mediation study. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 93(5), 945-958. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 44

Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson,

M. J. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social

exchange and affect-based perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 199-236.

Cummings, D. J., Poropat, A. E., Loxton, N. J., & Sheeran, N. (2017). Development and initial

validation of a multidimensional student performance scale. Learning and Individual

Differences, 59, 22-33.

DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects

of the Big Five. Journal of personality and social psychology, 93(5), 880-896.

Diefendorff, J. M., Richard, E. M., & Yang, J. (2008). Linking emotion regulation strategies to

affective events and negative emotions at work. Journal of Vocational behavior, 73(3),

498-508.

Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The mini-IPIP scales:

tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological

assessment, 18(2), 192-203.

Fox, S., Spector, P. E., Goh, A., Bruursema, K., & Kessler, S. R. (2012). The deviant citizen:

Measuring potential positive relations between counterproductive work behaviour and

organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational

Psychology, 85(1), 199-220.

Frewen, P. A., Lanius, R. A., Dozois, D. J., Neufeld, R. W., Pain, C., Hopper, J. W., Densmore,

M., & Stevens, T. K. (2008). Clinical and neural correlates of alexithymia in

posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of abnormal psychology, 117(1), 171-181. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 45

Gaddis, B., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). Failure feedback as an affective event:

Influences of leader affect on subordinate attitudes and performance. The Leadership

Quarterly, 15(5), 663-686.

Gardner, W. L., Fischer, D., & Hunt, J. G. J. (2009). Emotional labor and leadership: A threat to

authenticity? The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 466-482.

Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative" description of personality": the big-five factor structure.

Journal of personality and social psychology, 59(6), 1216-1229.

Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize

emotional labor. Journal of occupational health psychology, 5(1), 95-110.

Harms, P. D., & DeSimone, J. A. (2015). Caution! MTurk workers ahead—Fines

doubled. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 183-190.

Haviland, M. G., Warren, W. L., & Riggs, M. L. (2000). An observer scale to measure

alexithymia. Psychosomatics, 41(5), 385-392.

Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate behavioral

research, 50(1), 1-22.

Humphreys, T. P., Wood, L. M., & Parker, J. D. (2009). Alexithymia and satisfaction in intimate

relationships. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(1), 43-47.

IBM Corp. (2012). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

Ilies, R., Scott, B. A., & Judge, T. A. (2006). The interactive effects of personal traits and

experienced states on intraindividual patterns of citizenship behavior. Academy of

Management Journal, 49(3), 561-575. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 46

Ilies, R., Wagner, D. T., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Explaining affective linkages in teams:

individual differences in susceptibility to contagion and individualism-collectivism.

Journal of applied psychology, 92(4), 1140-1148.

Jackman, M. G. A., Leite, W. L., & Cochrane, D. J. (2011). Estimating latent variable

interactions with the unconstrained approach: A comparison of methods to form product

indicators for large, unequal numbers of items. Structural Equation Modeling, 18(2),

274-288.

Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job

satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 87(3), 530-541.

Klein, A., & Moosbrugger, H. (2000). Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction

effects with the LMS method. Psychometrika, 65(4), 457-474.

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY:

Guilford publications.

Kohn, P. M., Lafreniere, K., & Gurevich, M. (1990). The Inventory of College Students' Recent

Life Experiences: A decontaminated hassles scale for a special population. Journal of

behavioral medicine, 13(6), 619-630.

Lane, R. D., Weihs, K. L., Herring, A., Hishaw, A., & Smith, R. (2015). Affective agnosia:

Expansion of the alexithymia construct and a new opportunity to integrate and extend

Freud's legacy. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 55, 594-611.

Luminet, O., Bagby, R. M., Wagner, H., Taylor, G. J., & Parker, J. D. (1999). Relation between

alexithymia and the five-factor model of personality: A facet-level analysis. Journal of

personality assessment, 73(3), 345-358. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 47

Marchesi, C., Brusamonti, E., & Maggini, C. (2000). Are alexithymia, depression, and anxiety

distinct constructs in affective disorders?. Journal of psychosomatic research, 49(1), 43-

49.

Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K. T. (2004). Structural equation models of latent interactions:

evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological

methods, 9(3), 275-300.

Marty, P., & de M’Uzan, M. (1963). La ’pensée opératoire’ [Operative thinking]. Revue

Française de Psychanalyse, 27 (Suppl.), 1345–1356.

Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical

Turk. Behavior research methods, 44(1), 1-23.

Matta, F. K., Erol‐Korkmaz, H. T., Johnson, R. E., & Biçaksiz, P. (2014). Significant work

events and counterproductive work behavior: The role of fairness, emotions, and emotion

regulation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(7), 920-944.

Mattila, A. K., Ahola, K., Honkonen, T., Salminen, J. K., Huhtala, H., & Joukamaa, M. (2007).

Alexithymia and occupational burnout are strongly associated in working population.

Journal of psychosomatic research, 62(6), 657-665.

Maybery, D. J. (2004). Incorporating interpersonal events within uplift measurement. Social

Indicators Research, 68(1), 35-57.

Mignonac, K., & Herrbach, O. (2004). Linking work events, affective states, and attitudes: An

empirical study of managers' emotions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(2), 221-

240.

Montebarocci, O., Codispoti, M., Baldaro, B., & Rossi, N. (2004). Adult attachment style and

alexithymia. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(3), 499-507. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 48

Murphy, J., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2018). Alexithymia is associated with a multidomain,

multidimensional failure of interoception: Evidence from novel tests. Journal of

Experimental Psychology: General, 147(3), 398-408.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2015). Mplus. The comprehensive modelling program for applied

researchers: user’s guide [Computer software manual]. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

Nesnidol, S., Howald, N., Wise, S., Min, H., Peng, Y., & Matthews, R. A. (2018, April).

Insufficient Effort Responding in Online Samples: Perceptions and Practice. In Causes

and Perceptions of Insufficient Effort Responding and its Effects. Symposium presented

at the 33rd annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational

Psychology, Chicago, IL.

Parker, J. D., Austin, E. J., Hogan, M. J., Wood, L. M., & Bond, B. J. (2005). Alexithymia and

academic success: examining the transition from high school to university. Personality

and Individual Differences, 38(6), 1257-1267.

Parker, J. D., Keefer, K. V., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2008). Latent structure of the

alexithymia construct: a taxometric investigation. Psychological assessment, 20(4), 385-

396.

Parker, J. D., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2001). The relationship between emotional

intelligence and alexithymia. Personality and Individual differences, 30(1), 107-115.

Parker, J. D., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2003). The 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale: III.

Reliability and factorial validity in a community population. Journal of psychosomatic

research, 55(3), 269-275.

Paunonen, S. V., & Jackson, D. N. (2000). What is beyond the big five? Plenty!. Journal of

personality, 68(5), 821-835. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 49

Pirola-Merlo, A., Härtel, C., Mann, L., & Hirst, G. (2002). How leaders influence the impact of

affective events on team climate and performance in R&D teams. The leadership

quarterly, 13(5), 561-581.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method

biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended

remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879-903.

Reich, T. C., & Hershcovis, M. S. (2015). Observing workplace incivility. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 100(1), 203-215.

Salminen, J. K., Saarijärvi, S., Äärelä, E., Toikka, T., & Kauhanen, J. (1999). Prevalence of

alexithymia and its association with sociodemographic variables in the general population

of Finland. Journal of psychosomatic research, 46(1), 75-82.

Sardeshmukh, S. R., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2017). Integrating moderation and mediation: A

structural equation modeling approach. Organizational Research Methods, 20(4), 721-

745.

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement

with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and psychological

measurement, 66(4), 701-716.

Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., & Johnston, T. (2001). Appraisal processes in emotion. Oxford, UK:

Oxford University Press.

Sifneos, P. E. (1973). The prevalence of ‘alexithymic’ characteristics in psychosomatic patients.

Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 22(2-6), 255-262.

Spain, S. M., Harms, P., & LeBreton, J. M. (2014). The dark side of personality at work. Journal

of Organizational Behavior, 35(S41-S60). EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 50

Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., & Kessler, S. (2006). The

dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created

equal?. Journal of vocational behavior, 68(3), 446-460.

Taylor, G. J. (2000). Recent developments in alexithymia theory and research. The Canadian

Journal of Psychiatry, 45(2), 134-142.

Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2004). New trends in alexithymia research. Psychotherapy and

psychosomatics, 73(2), 68-77.

Taylor, G. J., Bagby, R. M., & Parker, J. D. (2016). What’s in the name ‘alexithymia’? A

commentary on “Affective agnosia: Expansion of the alexithymia construct and a new

opportunity to integrate and extend Freud’s legacy.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral

Reviews, 68, 1006-1020.

Taylor, G. J., Bagby, R. M., Ryan, D. P., & Parker, J. D. (1990). Validation of the alexithymia

construct: a measurement-based approach. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 35(4),

290-297.

Taylor, G. J., Parker, J. D., Bagby, R. M., & Bourke, M. P. (1996). Relationships between

alexithymia and psychological characteristics associated with eating disorders. Journal of

psychosomatic research, 41(6), 561-568.

Taylor, G. J., Ryan, D., & Bagby, M. (1985). Toward the development of a new self-report

alexithymia scale. Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 44(4), 191-199.

Totterdell, P., & Holman, D. (2003). Emotion regulation in customer service roles: Testing a

model of emotional labor. Journal of occupational health psychology, 8(1), 55-73. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 51

Van Katwyk, P. T., Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Using the Job-Related

Affective Well-Being Scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stressors.

Journal of occupational health psychology, 5(2), 219-230.

Wegge, J., Dick, R. V., Fisher, G. K., West, M. A., & Dawson, J. F. (2006). A test of basic

assumptions of affective events theory (AET) in call centre work. British Journal of

Management, 17(3), 237-254.

Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the

structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In B. M. Staw & L.

L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 19, pp. 1-74).

Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Wise, T. N., Mann, L. S., & Shay, L. (1992). Alexithymia and the five-factor model of

personality. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 33(3), 147-151.

Zackheim, L. (2007). Alexithymia: The expanding realm of research. Journal of psychosomatic

research, 63(4), 345-347.

Zhao, H. A. O., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., & Bravo, J. (2007). The impact of

psychological contract breach on work‐related outcomes: a meta‐analysis. Personnel

psychology, 60(3), 647-680.

Zimmermann, G., Rossier, J., Meyer de Stadelhofen, F., & Gaillard, F. (2005). Alexithymia

assessment and relations with dimensions of personality. European Journal of

Psychological Assessment, 21(1), 23-33.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 52

APPENDIX A. TABLES Table 1 Dimensions making up the alternate definitions of alexithymia Source Dimensions Bagby, Parker, & Taylor (1994) Difficulty identifying feelings Difficulty describing feelings Externally-oriented thinking Taylor, Ryan, & Bagby (1985) Difficulty identifying feelings Difficulty describing feelings Externally-oriented thinking Daydreaming Bermond, Vorst, Vingerhoets, & Gerritsen Emotionalizing (1999) Fantasizing Analyzing Identifying Verbalizing emotions Bermond et al. (2007) Cognitive Affective Haviland, Warren, & Riggs (2000) Distant Uninsightful Somatizing Humorless Rigid Note. This study uses the dimensions from Bagby, Parker, & Taylor (1994) to define alexithymia.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 53

Table 2

Means, standard deviations, and correlations for the student sample

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Alexithymia 2.65 0.60 (.85) 2. Alexithymia 2.51 0.92 .88** (.86) (Identifying) 3. Alexithymia 2.99 0.95 .84** .66** (.81) (Describing) 4. Alexithymia 2.55 0.51 .56** .23** .24** (.50) (Thinking) 5. Satisfaction 3.92 0.86 -.27** -.21** -.23** -.20** (.87) 6. Engagement 3.38 0.88 -.21** -.16** -.21** -.12* .53** (.79) 7. OCB 2.64 0.67 .04 .08 -.02 .01 .21** .31** (.86) 8. CWB 1.38 0.41 .25** .24** .15* .18** -.26** -.22** .09 (.90) 9. Positive Events 3.48 0.63 -.28** -.26** -.23** -.13* .31** .42** .35** -.07 (.94) 10. Negative Events 2.48 0.63 .49** .50** .39** .18** -.40** -.30** .07 .38** -.22** 11. Positive Emotions 2.96 0.71 -.31** -.26** -.28** -.17** .59** .53** .31** -.11 .48** 12. Negative Emotions 2.62 0.75 .44** .48** .36** .11 -.48** -.26** -.02 .23** -.22** 13. Openness 3.49 0.50 -.28** -.19** -.09 -.42** .14* .30** .02 -.18** .11 14. Conscientiousness 3.49 0.57 -.32** -.32** -.26** -.13* .38** .45** .17** -.31** .37** 15. Extraversion 3.42 0.54 -.35** -.25** -.40** -.15* .30** .27** .30** -.06 .35** 16. Agreeableness 4.10 0.49 -.21** -.11 -.05 -.39** .19** .21** .06 -.39** .18** 17. Neuroticism 3.05 0.64 .52** .60** .40** .12* -.30** -.24** -.15* .22** -.24** 18. GPA 3.41 0.52 -.14* -.11 -.13* -.07 .21** .19** .06 -.23** .09 Note. M and SD are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha is indicated in parentheses. * indicates p < .05, ** indicates p < .01.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 54

Means, standard deviations, and correlations for the student sample

Variable M SD 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10. Negative Events 2.48 0.63 (.96) 11. Positive Emotions 2.96 0.71 -.37** (.92) 12. Negative Emotions 2.62 0.75 .57** -.44** (.89) 13. Openness 3.49 0.50 -.18** .14* -.07 (.80) 14. Conscientiousness 3.49 0.57 -.45** .33** -.41** .17** (.86) 15. Extraversion 3.42 0.54 -.28** .34** -.29** .13* .40** (.86) 16. Agreeableness 4.10 0.49 -.13* .13* -.08 .36** .15* .10 (.85) 17. Neuroticism 3.05 0.64 .51** -.40** .55** -.19** -.42** -.37** -.04 (.88) 18. GPA 3.41 0.52 -.25** .18** -.25** .06 .36** .15* .10 -.20** (n/a) Note. M and SD are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha is indicated in parentheses. * indicates p < .05, ** indicates p < .01.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 55

Table 3

Means, standard deviations, and correlations for the MTurk sample

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Alexithymia 2.31 0.66 (.89) 2. Alexithymia 2.01 0.90 .89** (.90) (Identifying) 3. Alexithymia 2.39 0.95 .88** .72** (.83) (Describing) 4. Alexithymia 2.53 0.58 .74** .43** .51** (.60) (Thinking) 5. Satisfaction 3.92 1.04 -.17** -.13** -.19** -.11* (.94) 6. Engagement 3.74 0.99 -.24** -.21** -.24** -.14** .83** (.88) 7. OCB 2.70 0.76 .03 .12* -.04 -.04 .23** .31** (.94) 8. CWB 1.35 0.62 .48** .53** .34** .29** -.09* -.11* .25** (.98) 9. Positive Events 3.18 0.78 -.19** -.12** -.23** -.13** .51** .53** .44** .04 10. Negative Events 2.13 0.77 .57** .59** .44** .37** -.22** -.26** .24** .57** 11. Positive Emotions 2.99 0.90 -.15** -.07 -.21** -.12** .66** .69** .44** .06 12. Negative Emotions 2.07 0.82 .51** .51** .44** .31** -.52** -.53** .03 .43** 13. Openness 3.82 0.86 -.51** -.40** -.40** -.49** .09 .16** .03 -.36** 14. Conscientiousness 3.94 0.80 -.52** -.52** -.45** -.33** .22** .27** .02 -.38** 15. Extraversion 2.84 1.02 -.27** -.16** -.33** -.21** .20** .26** .22** .01 16. Agreeableness 3.73 0.87 -.48** -.34** -.43** -.47** .20** .25** .18** -.29** 17. Neuroticism 2.34 0.93 .49** .55** .43** .21** -.30** -.37** -.06 .24** Note. M and SD are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha is indicated in parentheses. * indicates p < .05, ** indicates p < .01.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 56

Means, standard deviations, and correlations for the MTurk sample

Variable M SD 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9. Positive Events 3.18 0.78 (.73) 10. Negative Events 2.13 0.77 -.03 (.85) 11. Positive Emotions 2.99 0.90 .71** -.06 (.94) 12. Negative Emotions 2.07 0.82 -.37** .61** -.43** (.91) 13. Openness 3.82 0.86 .11* -.36** .10* -.34** (.75) 14. Conscientiousness 3.94 0.80 .20** -.36** .17** -.40** .35** (.73) 15. Extraversion 2.84 1.02 .34** -.02 .32** -.17** .22** .05 (.82) 16. Agreeableness 3.73 0.87 .25** -.27** .25** -.34** .35** .33** .30** (.79) 17. Neuroticism 2.34 0.93 -.34** .38** -.33** .51** -.31** -.38** -.22** -.18** (.78) Note. M and SD are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha is indicated in parentheses. * indicates p < .05, ** indicates p < .01. EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 57

Table 4 Summary of hypothesis testing Hypothesis Result Student Sample MTurk Sample 1 Supported Supported 2 Supported Supported 3 Supported Supported 4 Not supported Supported 5 Supported Not supported 6 Not supported Not supported 7 Partially supported Not supported Partially supported Partial support for moderation, 8 but not moderated mediation 9 Not supported Supported 10 Supported Supported 11 Not supported Not supported 12 Not supported Not supported 13 Supported Supported 14 Not supported Supported 15 Not supported N/A

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 58

APPENDIX B. FIGURES Figure 1

Mediation model for positive events

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 59

Figure 2

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of all measures in the MTurk sample

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 60

Figure 3

Mediation model for negative events

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 61

Figure 4

Moderated mediation model for negative events

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 62

Figure 5

Moderated mediation model for positive events

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 63

APPENDIX C. STUDY ONE INSTRUMENT Please indicate how often you've experienced each emotion during your college experience over the past week.

Extremely Never Rarely Sometimes Quite often often My college experience made me feel o o o o o angry My college experience made me feel o o o o o anxious My college experience made me feel o o o o o at ease My college experience made me feel o o o o o bored My college experience made me feel o o o o o calm My college experience made me feel o o o o o content My college experience made me feel o o o o o depressed

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 64

My college experience made me feel o o o o o discouraged My college experience made me feel o o o o o disgusted My college experience made me feel o o o o o ecstatic My college experience made me feel o o o o o energetic My college experience made me feel o o o o o enthusiastic My college experience made me feel o o o o o excited My college experience made me feel o o o o o fatigued My college experience made me feel o o o o o frightened My college experience made me feel o o o o o furious My college experience made me feel o o o o o gloomy EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 65

My college experience made me feel o o o o o inspired My college experience made me feel o o o o o relaxed My college experience made me feel o o o o o satisfied Please select "Rarely" for this o o o o o statement.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 66

Please indicate how often you've experienced each of the following over the past week.

Quite Extremely Not Never Rarely Sometimes often often Applicable Conflict with significant other's family o o o o o o Being let down or disappointed o o o o o o by friends Conflict with professors o o o o o o Social rejection o o o o o o Too many things to do at once o o o o o o Being taken for granted o o o o o o Financial conflicts with family o o o o o o members Having your trust betrayed by a friend o o o o o o Separation from people you care about o o o o o o Having your contributions overlooked o o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 67

Struggling to meet your own academic o o o o o o standards Being taken advantage of o o o o o o Not enough leisure time o o o o o o Struggling to meet the academic standards of o o o o o o others A lot of responsibilities o o o o o o Dissatisfaction with school o o o o o o Decisions about intimate relationships o o o o o o Not enough time to meet your o o o o o o obligations Dissatisfaction with your mathematical o o o o o o ability Important decisions about your o o o o o o future career Financial burdens o o o o o o Dissatisfaction with your reading ability o o o o o o EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 68

Important decisions about your o o o o o o education

Loneliness o o o o o o Lower grades than you hoped for o o o o o o Conflict with teaching assistants o o o o o o Not enough time for sleep o o o o o o Conflicts with your family o o o o o o Heavy demands from extracurricular o o o o o o activities Finding courses too demanding o o o o o o Conflicts with friends o o o o o o Hard effort to get ahead o o o o o o Poor health of a friend o o o o o o Disliking your studies o o o o o o Getting "ripped off" or cheated in the purchase of o o o o o o services EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 69

Social conflicts over smoking o o o o o o Difficulties with transportation o o o o o o Disliking fellow students o o o o o o Conflicts with significant other o o o o o o Dissatisfaction with your ability at written o o o o o o expression Interruptions of your school work o o o o o o Social isolation o o o o o o Long waits to get service (e.g., at banks, o o o o o o stores, etc.)

Being ignored o o o o o o Dissatisfaction with your physical o o o o o o appearance Finding courses uninteresting o o o o o o Gossip concerning someone you o o o o o o care about EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 70

Failing to get expected job o o o o o o Dissatisfaction with your athletic skills o o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 71

Please indicate how often you've experienced each of the following over the past week.

Quite Extremely Not Never Rarely Sometimes often often Applicable Support received from professors o o o o o o Support given to professors o o o o o o Positive communication with professors o o o o o o Positive feedback from professors o o o o o o Doing enjoyable things with o o o o o o professors Intimate times with someone o o o o o o Positive feedback from spouse or o o o o o o partner Positive communication from spouse or o o o o o o partner Support given to spouse or partner o o o o o o Support received from spouse or o o o o o o partner

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 72

Positive communication with your o o o o o o parents Good times with your parents o o o o o o Support given to your parents o o o o o o Support received from your parents o o o o o o Positive feedback from your parents o o o o o o Doing enjoyable things with o o o o o o your parents Support received from friends o o o o o o Support given to friends o o o o o o Positive feedback from your friends o o o o o o Positive communication with friends o o o o o o Going to a party o o o o o o Going out for drinks o o o o o o

Social events o o o o o o EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 73

Support received from other students o o o o o o Support given to other students o o o o o o Positive communication with other o o o o o o students Positive feedback from other students o o o o o o Met course deadlines o o o o o o Enjoyed your coursework o o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 74

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I am often confused about what emotion I am o o o o o feeling I have physical sensations that even o o o o o doctors don't understand When I am upset, I don't know if I am sad, o o o o o frightened, or angry I am often puzzled by sensations in o o o o o my body I have feelings that I can't quite o o o o o identify I don't know what's going on inside me o o o o o I often don't know why I am angry o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 75

It is difficult for me to find the right words for my o o o o o feelings I am able to describe my feelings o o o o o easily I find it hard to describe how I feel o o o o o about people People tell me to describe my o o o o o feelings more It is difficult for me to reveal my innermost feelings, even o o o o o to close friends I prefer to analyze problems rather than o o o o o just describe them I prefer to just let things happen rather than to understand o o o o o why they turned out that way Being in touch with emotions is o o o o o essential EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 76

I prefer talking to people about their daily activities o o o o o rather than their feelings I prefer to watch "light" entertainment shows rather than o o o o o psychological dramas I can feel close to someone, even in o o o o o moments of silence I find examination of my feelings useful in o o o o o solving personal problems Looking for hidden meanings in movies or plays o o o o o distracts from their enjoyment Please indicate "Somewhat disagree" for o o o o o this item

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 77

Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following items.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I respect authority. o o o o o I insult people. o o o o o I hate to seem pushy. o o o o o I believe that I am better than others. o o o o o I avoid imposing my will on o o o o o others. I rarely put people under pressure. o o o o o I take advantage of others. o o o o o I seek conflict. o o o o o I love a good fight. o o o o o I am out for my own personal o o o o o gain. I am not interested in other people's o o o o o problems I feel others' emotions o o o o o EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 78

I inquire about others' well-being o o o o o I can't be bothered with other's needs o o o o o I sympathize with others' feelings o o o o o I am indifferent to the feelings o o o o o of others I take no time for others o o o o o I take an interest in other people's o o o o o lives I don't have a soft side o o o o o I like to do things for others o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 79

Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following items.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I get angry easily o o o o o I rarely get irritated o o o o o I get upset easily o o o o o I keep my emotions under control o o o o o I change my mood a lot o o o o o I rarely lose my composure o o o o o I am a person whose moods go up and o o o o o down easily I am not easily annoyed o o o o o I get easily agitated o o o o o I can be stirred up easily o o o o o I seldom feel blue o o o o o I am filled with doubts about things o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 80

I feel comfortable with myself o o o o o I feel threatened easily o o o o o I rarely feel depressed o o o o o I worry about things o o o o o I am easily discouraged o o o o o I am not embarrassed easily o o o o o I become overwhelmed by events o o o o o I am afraid of many things o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 81

Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following items.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I carry out my plans o o o o o I waste my time o o o o o I find it difficult to get down to o o o o o work I mess things up o o o o o I finish what I start o o o o o I don't put my mind on the task at o o o o o hand I get things done quickly o o o o o I always know what I am doing o o o o o I postpone decisions o o o o o I am easily distracted o o o o o I leave my belongings around o o o o o

I like order o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 82

I keep things tidy o o o o o I follow a schedule o o o o o I am not bothered by messy people o o o o o I want everything to be "just o o o o o right" I am not bothered by disorder o o o o o I dislike routine o o o o o I see that rules are observed o o o o o I want every detail taken care of o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 83

Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following items.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I make friends easily o o o o o I am hard to get to know o o o o o I keep others at a distance o o o o o I reveal little about myself o o o o o I warm up quickly to others o o o o o I rarely get caught up in the o o o o o excitement I am not a very enthusiastic o o o o o person I show my feelings when I'm happy o o o o o I have a lot of fun o o o o o

I laugh a lot o o o o o

I take charge o o o o o I have a strong personality o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 84

I lack the talent for influencing o o o o o people I know how to captivate people o o o o o I wait for others to lead the way o o o o o I see myself as a good leader o o o o o I can talk others into doing things o o o o o I hold back my opinions o o o o o I am the first to act o o o o o I do not have an assertive personality o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 85

Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following items.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I am quick to understand things o o o o o I have difficulty understanding o o o o o abstract ideas I can handle a lot of information o o o o o I like to solve complex problems o o o o o I avoid philosophical discussions o o o o o I avoid difficult reading o o o o o material I have a rich vocabulary o o o o o I think quickly o o o o o I learn things slowly o o o o o I formulate ideas clearly o o o o o I enjoy the beauty of nature o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 86

I believe in the importance of o o o o o art I love to reflect on things o o o o o I get deeply immersed in music o o o o o I do not like poetry o o o o o I see beauty in things that others might o o o o o not notice I need a creative outlet o o o o o I seldom get lost in thought o o o o o I seldom daydream o o o o o I seldom notice the emotional aspects of o o o o o paintings and pictures

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 87

Thinking about your college experience, please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree All in all, I am satisfied with my college o o o o o experience In general, I like my college o o o o o experience In general, I like the work I do in o o o o o college

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 88

Thinking about your coursework, please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree When doing coursework, I feel strong o o o o o and vigorous I am enthusiastic about my o o o o o coursework I am immersed in my o o o o o coursework

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 89

Thinking about your college life, how often have you done each of the following things over the past two weeks?

Never Almost never Sometimes Often Every day Listened and supported a student who was having o o o o o personal problems Picked up class material or provided class notes for a peer o o o o o when they were absent Shared study material or subject notes o o o o o Helped another student when they didn't understand or o o o o o struggled with the material Provided a classmate with material or stationary because they o o o o o ahd forgotten theirs Approached students who looked like they needed o o o o o assistance

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 90

Defended a student who was being o o o o o teased Participated in study groups with o o o o o other students Proof-read another students' o o o o o assignment Encouraged quiet students to contribute o o o o o to discussions Shared your positive university experiences o o o o o with others Picked up rubbish and placed it in o o o o o the bin

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 91

Thinking about your college life, how often have you done each of the following things over the past two weeks?

Never Almost never Sometimes Often Every day Plagiarised whole or part of an o o o o o assignment Cheated in an exam or test o o o o o Lied to get an extension on an o o o o o assignment Wrote negative comments about university or o o o o o staff on websites or social media Distracted others in a class o o o o o Talked over the top of other people o o o o o in class Ignored teaching staff's instructions o o o o o during class Littered on campus o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 92

Convinced another student to neglect their university o o o o o work to do something else Used inappropriate language in o o o o o class Lied to avoid class o o o o o Went to the university bar prior to class o o o o o Had an overdue library book o o o o o Made noise in a quiet study area of the o o o o o library Slept in a class o o o o o Made fun of another student o o o o o Attended a lecture or tutorial o o o o o hungover Talked negatively about the quality of the teaching staff, o o o o o classes, or university EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 93

Left a class early o o o o o

To the best of your knowledge, please indicate your current GPA here:

______

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 94

Which of the following categories best describes your employment status?

o Employed, working 1-23 hours per week o Employed, working 24-40 hours per week o Employed, working 41 or more hours per week o Not employed, looking for work o Not employed, NOT looking for work o Retired o Disabled, not able to work

How old are you?

______EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 95

In which industry are you currently employed?

o Forestry, fishing, hunting or agriculture support o Mining o Utilities o Construction o Manufacturing o Wholesale trade o Retail trade o Transportation or warehousing o Information o Finance or insurance o Real estate or rental and leasing o Professional, scientific or technical services o Management of companies or enterprises o Admin, support, waste management or remediation services o Educational services o Health care or social assistance o Arts, entertainment or recreation o Accommodation or food services o Other services (except public administration) o Unclassified establishments

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 96

Approximately how many hours per week do you spend working for your employer?

______

What is the highest level of education you have completed?

o Less than High School o High School / GED o Some College o 2-year College Degree o 4-year College Degree o Masters Degree o Doctoral Degree o Professional Degree (JD, MD)

What is your race?

o White/Caucasian o African American o Hispanic o Asian o Native American o Pacific Islander o Other

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 97

What is your gender?

o Male o Female o Other/Prefer not to identify

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 98

APPENDIX D. STUDY TWO INSTRUMENT Time 1

Do you currently have a job other than your work with MTurk?

o Yes o No

Please indicate your MTurk Worker ID here. This information will be used to link your responses across multiple timepoints.

______

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 99

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I am often confused about what emotion I am o o o o o feeling I have physical sensations that even o o o o o doctors don't understand When I am upset, I don't know if I am sad, o o o o o frightened, or angry I am often puzzled by sensations in o o o o o my body I have feelings that I can't quite o o o o o identify I don't know what's going on inside me o o o o o I often don't know why I am angry o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 100

It is difficult for me to find the right words for my o o o o o feelings I am able to describe my feelings o o o o o easily I find it hard to describe how I feel o o o o o about people People tell me to describe my o o o o o feelings more It is difficult for me to reveal my innermost feelings, even o o o o o to close friends I prefer to analyze problems rather than o o o o o just describe them I prefer to just let things happen rather than to understand o o o o o why they turned out that way Being in touch with emotions is o o o o o essential EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 101

I prefer talking to people about their daily activities o o o o o rather than their feelings I prefer to watch "light" entertainment shows rather than o o o o o psychological dramas I can feel close to someone, even in o o o o o moments of silence I find examination of my feelings useful in o o o o o solving personal problems Looking for hidden meanings in movies or plays o o o o o distracts from their enjoyment Please indicate "Somewhat disagree" for o o o o o this item

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 102

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree I am the life of the party o o o o o I sympathize with others' feelings o o o o o I get chores done right away o o o o o I have frequent mood swings o o o o o I have a vivid imagination o o o o o I don't talk a lot o o o o o I am not interested in other people's o o o o o problems I often forget to put things back in their o o o o o proper place I am relaxed most of the time o o o o o I am not interested in abstract ideas o o o o o I talk to a lot of different people at o o o o o parties

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 103

I feel others' emotions o o o o o

I like order o o o o o I get upset easily o o o o o I have difficulty understanding o o o o o abstract ideas I keep in the background o o o o o I am not really interested in o o o o o others I make a mess of things o o o o o I seldom feel blue o o o o o Please select "Strongly disagree" for o o o o o this item I do not have a good imagination o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 104

Please indicate how often you've experienced each of the following at work over the past week.

Extremely Never Rarely Sometimes Quite often often Accomplished what you hoped for o o o o o Received information that positively affected your work schedule, o o o o o duties, or pay Received positive feedback or praise o o o o o Had fun and socialized o o o o o Received negative feedback or criticism/complaints o o o o o Worked with difficult people o o o o o Received information that negatively affected your work schedule, o o o o o duties, or pay Got treated disrespectfully o o o o o Had work-related conflict o o o o o Had personal tasks interfere with your work o o o o o Had thoughts of family interfere with your work o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 105

Please indicate how often you've experienced each emotion at work over the past week.

Extremely Never Rarely Sometimes Quite often often My job made me feel angry o o o o o My job made me feel anxious o o o o o My job made me feel at ease o o o o o My job made me feel bored o o o o o My job made me feel calm o o o o o My job made me feel content o o o o o My job made me feel depressed o o o o o My job made me feel discouraged o o o o o My job made me feel disgusted o o o o o My job made me feel ecstatic o o o o o My job made me feel energetic o o o o o My job made me feel enthusiastic o o o o o EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 106

My job made me feel excited o o o o o My job made me feel fatigued o o o o o My job made me feel frightened o o o o o My job made me feel furious o o o o o My job made me feel gloomy o o o o o My job made me feel inspired o o o o o My job made me feel relaxed o o o o o My job made me feel satisfied o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 107

Which of the following categories best describes your employment status?

o Employed, working 1-23 hours per week o Employed, working 24-40 hours per week o Employed, working 41 or more hours per week o Not employed, looking for work o Not employed, NOT looking for work o Retired o Disabled, not able to work

What percentage of your PAID work time do you complete from home?

o 0% to 9% o 10% to 19% o 20% to 29% o 30% to 39% o 40% to 49% o 50% to 59% o 60% to 69% o 70% to 79% o 80% to 89% o 90% to 99% o 100%

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 108

Which of the following best describes the size (approximately) of your current organization? If your organization has more than one facility/ location, please provide the size of the facility/location at which you currently work.

o Not applicable o I am self employed o less than 25 people o 26-50 people o 51-75 people o 76-100 people o 101-200 people o 201-500 people o over 500 people

As part of your job, do you have a direct supervisor, manager, or someone you must report to on a regular basis?

o Yes o No o Not applicable

How old are you?

______

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 109

In which industry are you currently employed?

o Forestry, fishing, hunting or agriculture support o Mining o Utilities o Construction o Manufacturing o Wholesale trade o Retail trade o Transportation or warehousing o Information o Finance or insurance o Real estate or rental and leasing o Professional, scientific or technical services o Management of companies or enterprises o Admin, support, waste management or remediation services o Educational services o Health care or social assistance o Arts, entertainment or recreation o Accommodation or food services o Other services (except public administration) o Unclassified establishments

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 110

Approximately how many hours per week do you spend working for your employer?

______

What is the highest level of education you have completed?

o Less than High School o High School / GED o Some College o 2-year College Degree o 4-year College Degree o Masters Degree o Doctoral Degree o Professional Degree (JD, MD)

What is your race?

o White/Caucasian o African American o Hispanic o Asian o Native American o Pacific Islander o Other

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 111

What is your gender?

o Male o Female o Other/Prefer not to identify

Your MTurk validation code is: ##### You will need to enter this code in the MTurk window in order to receive payment.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 112

Time 2

Do you currently have a job other than your work with MTurk?

o Yes o No

Please indicate your MTurk Worker ID here. This information will be used to link your responses across multiple timepoints.

______

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 113

Thinking about your job, please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree All in all, I am satisfied with my job o o o o o In general, I like my job o o o o o In general, I like working for my present o o o o o employer

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 114

Thinking about your job, please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following.

Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly

disagree disagree nor disagree agree agree At my job, I feel strong and vigorous o o o o o I am enthusiastic about my job o o o o o I am immersed in my work o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 115

How often have you done each of the following things over the past two weeks?

Almost Never Sometimes Often Every day never Picked up meal for others at work o o o o o Took time to advise, coach, or mentor a co- o o o o o worker Helped co- worker learn new skills or shared job o o o o o knowledge Helped new employees get oriented to the o o o o o job Lent a compassionate ear when someone had a o o o o o work problem Lent a compassionate ear when someone had a o o o o o personal problem Changed vacation schedule, work days, or shifts to o o o o o accommodate co-worker's needs

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 116

Offered suggestions to improve how o o o o o work is done Offered suggestions for improving the work o o o o o environment Finished something for co-worker who had to leave o o o o o early Helped a less capable co- worker lift a heavy box or o o o o o other object Helped a co- worker who had too much o o o o o to do Volunteered for extra work assignments o o o o o Took phone messages for absent or busy o o o o o co-worker Said good things about your employer in front of o o o o o others Gave up meal and other breaks to o o o o o complete work EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 117

Volunteered to help a co- worker deal with a difficult customer, o o o o o vendor, or co- worker Went out of the way to give co- worker encouragement o o o o o or express appreciation Decorated, straightened up, or otherwise beautified o o o o o common work space Defended a co- worker who was being "put down" or spoken ill of by o o o o o other co- workers or supervisor

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 118

How often have you done each of the following things over the past two weeks?

Almost Never Sometimes Often Every day never Purposely wasted your employer's materials/supplies o o o o o Purposely did your work incorrectly o o o o o Came to work late without permission o o o o o Stayed home from work and said you were sick when you o o o o o weren't Purposely damaged a piece of equipment or o o o o o property Purposely dirtied or littered your place of work o o o o o Stolen something belonging to your employer o o o o o Started or continued a damaging or harmful rumor at o o o o o work Been nasty or rude to a client or customer o o o o o

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 119

Purposely worked slowly when things needed to o o o o o get done Taken a longer break than you were allowed to o o o o o take Purposely failed to follow instructions o o o o o Left work earlier than you were allowed to o o o o o Insulted someone about their job performance o o o o o Made fun of someone's personal life o o o o o Took supplies or tools home without o o o o o permission Put in to be paid for more hours than you worked o o o o o Took money from your employer without o o o o o permission Ignored someone at work o o o o o Blamed someone at work for an error you made o o o o o Started an argument with someone at work o o o o o EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 120

Stole something belonging to someone at work o o o o o Verbally abused someone at work o o o o o Made an obscene gesture (the finger) to o o o o o someone at work Threatened someone at work with violence o o o o o Threatened someone at work, but not physically o o o o o Said something obscene to someone at work to make them feel o o o o o bad Did something to make someone at work look bad o o o o o Played a mean prank to embarrass o o o o o someone at work Looked at someone at work's private mail/property o o o o o without permission Hit or pushed someone at work o o o o o Insulted or made fun of someone at work o o o o o EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 121

Please select "Every day" for this statement o o o o o

Your MTurk validation code is: ##### You will need to enter this code in the MTurk window in order to receive payment.

EXAMINING ALEXITHYMIA IN AFFECTIVE EVENTS THEORY 122

APPENDIX E. IRB LETTER

DATE: October 8, 2018 TO: Nicholas Howald FROM: Bowling Green State University Institutional Review Board PROJECT TITLE: [1324891-2] Examining Alexithymia Through Affective Events Theory SUBMISSION TYPE: Revision ACTION: DETERMINATION OF EXEMPT STATUS DECISION DATE: October 4, 2018 REVIEW CATEGORY: Exemption category # 2

Thank you for your submission of Revision materials for this project. The Bowling Green State University Institutional Review Board has determined this project is exempt from IRB review according to federal regulations AND that the proposed research has met the principles outlined in the Belmont Report. You may now begin the research activities.

Note that changes cannot be made to exempt research because of the possibility that proposed changes may change the research in such a way that it no longer meets the criteria for exemption. If you want to make changes to this project, contact the Office of Research Compliance for guidance.

We will retain a copy of this correspondence within our records.

If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Research Compliance at 419-372-7716 or [email protected]. Please include your project title and reference number in all correspondence with this committee.

This letter has been electronically signed in accordance with all applicable regulations, and a copy is retained within Bowling Green State University Institutional Review Board's records.