Roberta Fida , Ivan Marzocchi , Mamoona Arshad , Marinella Paciello , Claudio Barbaranelli , Carlo Tramontano
{"title":"Self-efficacy and nontask performance at work. A meta-analytic summary","authors":"Roberta Fida , Ivan Marzocchi , Mamoona Arshad , Marinella Paciello , Claudio Barbaranelli , Carlo Tramontano","doi":"10.1016/j.paid.2025.113179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Self-efficacy plays a critical role in guiding and maintaining behaviours across various life domains, including organisational settings where it enhances task-specific performance. This paper extends the role of self-efficacy to nontask or contextual performance, focusing on citizenship and counterproductive performance. Through a systematic review and meta-analysis, we examine its role as both an antecedent and a moderator. Among 11,877 records, 176 papers (194 independent studies) were included in the systematic review, and 158 papers (172 independent studies) in the meta-analysis. Findings support our hypotheses. In relation to citizenship performance (<em>N</em> = 49,464) results showed that self-efficacious individuals are more likely to engage in extra-role activities, fostering personal, collective, and organisational development (<span><math><mover><mi>ρ</mi><mo>¯</mo></mover><mo>=</mo><mn>.45</mn></math></span>). They exhibit proactive behaviours such as voicing concerns, providing exceptional customer service, and helping behaviours. Additionally, self-efficacy serves as a protective factor against counterproductive and antisocial performance detrimental to organisations and stakeholders (<em>N</em> = 12,498, <span><math><mover><mi>ρ</mi><mo>¯</mo></mover><mo>=</mo><mo>−</mo><mn>.24</mn></math></span>). While studies on the moderation of self-efficacy are limited, our systematic review confirms its role in buffering the impact of adverse working conditions on counterproductive performance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48467,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Individual Differences","volume":"241 ","pages":"Article 113179"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886925001412","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Self-efficacy plays a critical role in guiding and maintaining behaviours across various life domains, including organisational settings where it enhances task-specific performance. This paper extends the role of self-efficacy to nontask or contextual performance, focusing on citizenship and counterproductive performance. Through a systematic review and meta-analysis, we examine its role as both an antecedent and a moderator. Among 11,877 records, 176 papers (194 independent studies) were included in the systematic review, and 158 papers (172 independent studies) in the meta-analysis. Findings support our hypotheses. In relation to citizenship performance (N = 49,464) results showed that self-efficacious individuals are more likely to engage in extra-role activities, fostering personal, collective, and organisational development (). They exhibit proactive behaviours such as voicing concerns, providing exceptional customer service, and helping behaviours. Additionally, self-efficacy serves as a protective factor against counterproductive and antisocial performance detrimental to organisations and stakeholders (N = 12,498, ). While studies on the moderation of self-efficacy are limited, our systematic review confirms its role in buffering the impact of adverse working conditions on counterproductive performance.
期刊介绍:
Personality and Individual Differences is devoted to the publication of articles (experimental, theoretical, review) which aim to integrate as far as possible the major factors of personality with empirical paradigms from experimental, physiological, animal, clinical, educational, criminological or industrial psychology or to seek an explanation for the causes and major determinants of individual differences in concepts derived from these disciplines. The editors are concerned with both genetic and environmental causes, and they are particularly interested in possible interaction effects.