Workplace inauthenticity increases organizational cynicism: Multimethod and multicultural evidence.

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General Pub Date : 2026-05-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-26 DOI:10.1037/xge0001908
Li Huang, Eric Y Lou
{"title":"Workplace inauthenticity increases organizational cynicism: Multimethod and multicultural evidence.","authors":"Li Huang, Eric Y Lou","doi":"10.1037/xge0001908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Organizational psychology portrays workplace inauthenticity as an aversive state that individuals passively endure. Social psychology regards it as a threat to individuals' virtuous true self that they actively defend against. Bridging the two literatures, we predict that workplace inauthenticity triggers an active defense in the form of organizational cynicism, an effect mediated through perceived person-organization value incongruence. The current research reports six studies (total <i>N</i> = 2,844) testing these novel predictions. Using an experimental-causal-chain design, Studies 1a and 2 found that experimentally manipulated workplace inauthenticity predicted perceived value incongruence, and experimentally manipulated value incongruence predicted organizational cynicism. Using a cross-lagged design and a multicultural sample, Study 1b triangulated Study 1a in the field. Using a time-lagged design and ecologically valid or behavioral measures of organizational cynicism, controlling for trait cynicism and trait negative affectivity, and bolstered by non-U.S. or preregistered pilot studies reported in the Supplemental File, Study 3 found support for our predictions in the field. Experimentally or statistically excluding negative affect as a confound or an alternative mechanism, and bolstered by pilot studies reported in the Supplemental File, Studies 4a and 4b examined indirect effects of manipulated workplace inauthenticity on organizational cynicism via perceived value incongruence. We conclude that individuals agentically cope with workplace inauthenticity through morally delegitimizing expressions and subversive behaviors toward employing organizations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":" ","pages":"1151-1171"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001908","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Organizational psychology portrays workplace inauthenticity as an aversive state that individuals passively endure. Social psychology regards it as a threat to individuals' virtuous true self that they actively defend against. Bridging the two literatures, we predict that workplace inauthenticity triggers an active defense in the form of organizational cynicism, an effect mediated through perceived person-organization value incongruence. The current research reports six studies (total N = 2,844) testing these novel predictions. Using an experimental-causal-chain design, Studies 1a and 2 found that experimentally manipulated workplace inauthenticity predicted perceived value incongruence, and experimentally manipulated value incongruence predicted organizational cynicism. Using a cross-lagged design and a multicultural sample, Study 1b triangulated Study 1a in the field. Using a time-lagged design and ecologically valid or behavioral measures of organizational cynicism, controlling for trait cynicism and trait negative affectivity, and bolstered by non-U.S. or preregistered pilot studies reported in the Supplemental File, Study 3 found support for our predictions in the field. Experimentally or statistically excluding negative affect as a confound or an alternative mechanism, and bolstered by pilot studies reported in the Supplemental File, Studies 4a and 4b examined indirect effects of manipulated workplace inauthenticity on organizational cynicism via perceived value incongruence. We conclude that individuals agentically cope with workplace inauthenticity through morally delegitimizing expressions and subversive behaviors toward employing organizations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

工作场所的不真实性增加了组织的玩世不恭:多方法和多元文化证据。
组织心理学将工作场所的不真实性描述为个体被动忍受的厌恶状态。社会心理学认为它是对个体美德真我的一种威胁,是个体积极防范的。结合这两篇文献,我们预测工作场所的不真实性会以组织玩世不恭的形式引发一种积极的防御,这种效果通过感知到的人与组织的价值不一致来调节。目前的研究报告了六项研究(总共N = 2,844)来验证这些新颖的预测。采用实验因果链设计,研究1a和2发现,实验操纵的工作场所不真实性预测感知价值不一致,实验操纵的价值不一致预测组织玩世不恭。使用交叉滞后设计和多元文化样本,研究1b对研究1a进行了实地三角化。采用时间滞后设计和生态有效的组织玩世不恭或行为测量,控制特质玩世不恭和特质消极情感,并辅以非美国。或补充文件中报告的预注册试点研究,研究3支持我们在该领域的预测。通过实验或统计排除负面影响作为混淆或替代机制,并在补充文件中报告的试点研究的支持下,研究4a和4b通过感知价值不一致检查了被操纵的工作场所不真实性对组织玩世主义的间接影响。我们的结论是,个体通过道德上的非合法性表达和对雇佣组织的颠覆行为来应对工作场所的不真实性。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2026 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书