Christopher C Rosen, Joel Koopman, Allison S Gabriel, Young Eun Lee, Maira Ezerins, Philip L Roth
{"title":"工作中政治对话的隐藏后果:环境政治对话如何以及为何影响员工的工作成果。","authors":"Christopher C Rosen, Joel Koopman, Allison S Gabriel, Young Eun Lee, Maira Ezerins, Philip L Roth","doi":"10.1037/apl0001171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Discussions of politics have become increasingly common in the workplace, likely due to increasing political polarization around the world. Because of this, political conversations have the potential to be emotionally charged and disruptive, creating tension in the workplace and negatively affecting employee productivity and well-being. In light of this possibility, the goal of the current investigation was to examine the costs of <i>ambient political conversations</i> in the workplace, assuming that simply overhearing such discussions-without being a participant in them-may have unintended consequences for employees. Across three studies, our findings indicated that employees experience negative affect after overhearing political conversations at work, with these effects being attenuated (amplified) in contexts where employees perceive that their coworkers are more (less) similar to them. In addition to unpacking the mechanisms through which ambient workplace political conversations might impact employee outcomes, our findings from Studies 3A-B provide evidence that under certain circumstances (i.e., when employees agree with the content of ambient workplace political conversations), employees may experience a boost in positive affect after overhearing such conversations at work. Altogether, our findings provide insight into the costs and potential benefits associated with overhearing coworkers discussing politics in the workplace, particularly for those employees who perceive themselves to be dissimilar from their coworkers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hidden consequences of political discourse at work: How and why ambient political conversations impact employee outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Christopher C Rosen, Joel Koopman, Allison S Gabriel, Young Eun Lee, Maira Ezerins, Philip L Roth\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/apl0001171\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Discussions of politics have become increasingly common in the workplace, likely due to increasing political polarization around the world. Because of this, political conversations have the potential to be emotionally charged and disruptive, creating tension in the workplace and negatively affecting employee productivity and well-being. In light of this possibility, the goal of the current investigation was to examine the costs of <i>ambient political conversations</i> in the workplace, assuming that simply overhearing such discussions-without being a participant in them-may have unintended consequences for employees. Across three studies, our findings indicated that employees experience negative affect after overhearing political conversations at work, with these effects being attenuated (amplified) in contexts where employees perceive that their coworkers are more (less) similar to them. In addition to unpacking the mechanisms through which ambient workplace political conversations might impact employee outcomes, our findings from Studies 3A-B provide evidence that under certain circumstances (i.e., when employees agree with the content of ambient workplace political conversations), employees may experience a boost in positive affect after overhearing such conversations at work. Altogether, our findings provide insight into the costs and potential benefits associated with overhearing coworkers discussing politics in the workplace, particularly for those employees who perceive themselves to be dissimilar from their coworkers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15135,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001171\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001171","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在工作场所讨论政治已变得越来越普遍,这可能是由于全球政治两极分化日益严重。正因为如此,政治对话有可能会引发情绪波动和破坏性影响,造成工作场所的紧张气氛,并对员工的工作效率和身心健康产生负面影响。鉴于这种可能性,本次调查的目标是研究工作场所环境政治对话的成本,假设仅仅是无意中听到此类讨论,而不是参与其中,可能会对员工造成意想不到的后果。在三项研究中,我们的研究结果表明,员工在工作中无意听到政治对话后会产生负面影响,而在员工认为同事与自己更相似(更不相似)的情况下,这些影响会减弱(放大)。除了揭示工作场所的环境政治对话可能影响员工结果的机制外,我们在研究 3A-B 中的发现还提供了证据,证明在某些情况下(即员工同意工作场所的环境政治对话内容时),员工在工作中无意听到此类对话后可能会产生积极的情绪。总之,我们的研究结果让我们深入了解了偷听同事在工作场所讨论政治所带来的成本和潜在益处,尤其是对那些认为自己与同事不同的员工而言。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
Hidden consequences of political discourse at work: How and why ambient political conversations impact employee outcomes.
Discussions of politics have become increasingly common in the workplace, likely due to increasing political polarization around the world. Because of this, political conversations have the potential to be emotionally charged and disruptive, creating tension in the workplace and negatively affecting employee productivity and well-being. In light of this possibility, the goal of the current investigation was to examine the costs of ambient political conversations in the workplace, assuming that simply overhearing such discussions-without being a participant in them-may have unintended consequences for employees. Across three studies, our findings indicated that employees experience negative affect after overhearing political conversations at work, with these effects being attenuated (amplified) in contexts where employees perceive that their coworkers are more (less) similar to them. In addition to unpacking the mechanisms through which ambient workplace political conversations might impact employee outcomes, our findings from Studies 3A-B provide evidence that under certain circumstances (i.e., when employees agree with the content of ambient workplace political conversations), employees may experience a boost in positive affect after overhearing such conversations at work. Altogether, our findings provide insight into the costs and potential benefits associated with overhearing coworkers discussing politics in the workplace, particularly for those employees who perceive themselves to be dissimilar from their coworkers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including:
1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses).
2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research.
3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.