A Comprehensive Meta-Analyses of the Nomological Network of Psychological Capital (PsyCap)

IF 5 3区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Saeed Loghman, M. Quinn, S. Dawkins, Megan Woods, Sumeet Om Sharma, Jenn Scott
{"title":"A Comprehensive Meta-Analyses of the Nomological Network of Psychological Capital (PsyCap)","authors":"Saeed Loghman, M. Quinn, S. Dawkins, Megan Woods, Sumeet Om Sharma, Jenn Scott","doi":"10.1177/15480518221107998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents the most rigorous meta-analysis undertaken to date of empirical literature examining antecedents and outcomes related to psychological capital (PsyCap), and moderators of these relationships. We investigated seven leadership styles as antecedents of PsyCap (authentic, ethical, servant, empowering, transactional, transformational, and abusive leadership), five outcomes (burnout, turnover intentions, work engagement, performance, and satisfaction), and the impact of four moderators (country of sample origin, cultural characteristics, industry type, and research design). Our analysis of PsyCap research (2007–2020) examined 244 studies (254 independent samples and over 96000 participants), which is over twice as large as previous PsyCap meta-analyses. To optimize the quality and reliability of findings, we corrected for artefacts and included heterogeneity, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses. Our results provide several new findings beyond previous PsyCap meta-analyses. We found that empowering, servant, transformational, and transactional leadership were all positively associated with PsyCap, with empowering and transformational leadership being the strongest antecedents of PsyCap and abusive and transactional leadership being the weakest. The findings demonstrated PsyCap was positively associated with work engagement, and negatively associated with burnout. Country of sample origin moderated all the relationships, except for servant and transactional leadership. Additionally, cultural characteristics (e.g., power distance, masculinity, long-term orientation, and uncertainty avoidance) moderated several conceptual relationships. Study design was also found to moderate the PsyCap—work engagement relationship. Collectively, these findings offer new and extended insights into the antecedents, outcomes, and moderators related to PsyCap, beyond previous meta-analyses. The theoretical and practical implications of these new findings are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":51455,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","volume":"30 1","pages":"108 - 128"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518221107998","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

This paper presents the most rigorous meta-analysis undertaken to date of empirical literature examining antecedents and outcomes related to psychological capital (PsyCap), and moderators of these relationships. We investigated seven leadership styles as antecedents of PsyCap (authentic, ethical, servant, empowering, transactional, transformational, and abusive leadership), five outcomes (burnout, turnover intentions, work engagement, performance, and satisfaction), and the impact of four moderators (country of sample origin, cultural characteristics, industry type, and research design). Our analysis of PsyCap research (2007–2020) examined 244 studies (254 independent samples and over 96000 participants), which is over twice as large as previous PsyCap meta-analyses. To optimize the quality and reliability of findings, we corrected for artefacts and included heterogeneity, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses. Our results provide several new findings beyond previous PsyCap meta-analyses. We found that empowering, servant, transformational, and transactional leadership were all positively associated with PsyCap, with empowering and transformational leadership being the strongest antecedents of PsyCap and abusive and transactional leadership being the weakest. The findings demonstrated PsyCap was positively associated with work engagement, and negatively associated with burnout. Country of sample origin moderated all the relationships, except for servant and transactional leadership. Additionally, cultural characteristics (e.g., power distance, masculinity, long-term orientation, and uncertainty avoidance) moderated several conceptual relationships. Study design was also found to moderate the PsyCap—work engagement relationship. Collectively, these findings offer new and extended insights into the antecedents, outcomes, and moderators related to PsyCap, beyond previous meta-analyses. The theoretical and practical implications of these new findings are also discussed.
心理资本游牧网络的综合元分析(PsyCap)
本文介绍了迄今为止进行的最严格的实证文献荟萃分析,研究了与心理资本(PsyCap)相关的前因和结果,以及这些关系的调节因素。我们调查了七种领导风格作为心理资本的前因(真实、道德、仆人、赋权、交易、转型和滥用领导)、五种结果(倦怠、离职意向、工作投入、绩效和满意度)以及四个调节因素(样本来源国、文化特征、行业类型和研究设计)的影响。我们对心理资本研究的分析(2007-2020)检查了244项研究(254个独立样本和96000多名参与者),这是之前心理资本荟萃分析的两倍多。为了优化研究结果的质量和可靠性,我们校正了伪影,并包括异质性、敏感性和发表偏倚分析。我们的研究结果提供了一些新的发现,超越了以前的心理资本荟萃分析。我们发现,赋权、仆人、变革型和交易型领导都与心理资本呈正相关,其中赋权和变革型领导是心理资本最强的前因,滥用和交易型领导力最弱。研究结果表明,心理资本与工作投入呈正相关,与倦怠呈负相关。除了仆人和交易型领导之外,样本来源国调节了所有关系。此外,文化特征(如权力距离、男子气概、长期取向和避免不确定性)调节了几种概念关系。研究设计也被发现可以调节心理资本与工作投入的关系。总的来说,这些发现为与PsyCap相关的前因、结果和调节因子提供了新的和扩展的见解,超越了以前的荟萃分析。还讨论了这些新发现的理论和实践意义。
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
9.70
自引率
2.10%
发文量
23
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信