先前遭受的痛苦会降低对职场痛苦者的同情质量

IF 6.2 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Reut Livne-Tarandach, Hooria Jazaieri, Verónica Caridad Rabelo
{"title":"先前遭受的痛苦会降低对职场痛苦者的同情质量","authors":"Reut Livne-Tarandach,&nbsp;Hooria Jazaieri,&nbsp;Verónica Caridad Rabelo","doi":"10.1002/job.2799","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>In difficult times, how can we alleviate employees' distress? Lay beliefs suggest that high-quality compassionate responses come from those who have “been there” before. According to hot–cold empathy gap theory, however, firsthand experience with another's distress may activate distorted memories of past distress, leading people to underestimate the severity and difficulty of another's current distress. Grounded in a relational perspective of compassion, we examine how sufferers experience the quality of actions taken to alleviate their distress (i.e., compassion action quality; CAQ), along with the responders' perceptions of their own responses (i.e., self-efficacy). Across three studies, we find that sufferers experience lower CAQ from responders who have (vs. have not) previously endured a similar distress. We examine three mechanisms that explain the negative effect of previously endured distress on CAQ, based on responders' self-focus, validation of sufferer's distress, and self-efficacy. We also examine the boundary conditions of this effect and find that it is distress specific. Specifically, this effect does not hold when responders who previously endured distress respond to sufferers who are currently enduring a <i>different</i> type of distress. These findings advance organizational research on compassion and inform efforts to improve people's capacity to alleviate distress at work.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48450,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 7","pages":"935-959"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Previously endured distress reduces the quality of the compassion extended toward sufferers of workplace distress\",\"authors\":\"Reut Livne-Tarandach,&nbsp;Hooria Jazaieri,&nbsp;Verónica Caridad Rabelo\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/job.2799\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>In difficult times, how can we alleviate employees' distress? Lay beliefs suggest that high-quality compassionate responses come from those who have “been there” before. According to hot–cold empathy gap theory, however, firsthand experience with another's distress may activate distorted memories of past distress, leading people to underestimate the severity and difficulty of another's current distress. Grounded in a relational perspective of compassion, we examine how sufferers experience the quality of actions taken to alleviate their distress (i.e., compassion action quality; CAQ), along with the responders' perceptions of their own responses (i.e., self-efficacy). Across three studies, we find that sufferers experience lower CAQ from responders who have (vs. have not) previously endured a similar distress. We examine three mechanisms that explain the negative effect of previously endured distress on CAQ, based on responders' self-focus, validation of sufferer's distress, and self-efficacy. We also examine the boundary conditions of this effect and find that it is distress specific. Specifically, this effect does not hold when responders who previously endured distress respond to sufferers who are currently enduring a <i>different</i> type of distress. These findings advance organizational research on compassion and inform efforts to improve people's capacity to alleviate distress at work.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48450,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Organizational Behavior\",\"volume\":\"45 7\",\"pages\":\"935-959\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Organizational Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.2799\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.2799","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 在困难时期,我们如何才能减轻员工的痛苦?一般人认为,那些 "曾经经历过 "的人能够做出高质量的同情反应。然而,根据冷热移情差距理论,亲身经历过他人痛苦的人可能会激活对过去痛苦的扭曲记忆,从而导致人们低估他人当前痛苦的严重性和难度。基于同情的关系视角,我们研究了受难者如何体验为减轻其痛苦而采取的行动的质量(即同情行动质量;CAQ),以及回应者对其自身回应的看法(即自我效能感)。在三项研究中,我们发现受难者从以前经历过(与未经历过)类似痛苦的回应者那里获得的 CAQ 较低。我们根据应答者的自我关注、对患者痛苦的验证以及自我效能,研究了三种机制,以解释先前经历的痛苦对 CAQ 的负面影响。我们还研究了这一效应的边界条件,发现它具有特定的困扰。具体地说,当以前遭受过痛苦的回应者回应目前正遭受不同类型痛苦的受难者时,这种效应不成立。这些发现推动了有关同情心的组织研究,并为提高人们缓解工作中的痛苦的能力提供了参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Previously endured distress reduces the quality of the compassion extended toward sufferers of workplace distress

In difficult times, how can we alleviate employees' distress? Lay beliefs suggest that high-quality compassionate responses come from those who have “been there” before. According to hot–cold empathy gap theory, however, firsthand experience with another's distress may activate distorted memories of past distress, leading people to underestimate the severity and difficulty of another's current distress. Grounded in a relational perspective of compassion, we examine how sufferers experience the quality of actions taken to alleviate their distress (i.e., compassion action quality; CAQ), along with the responders' perceptions of their own responses (i.e., self-efficacy). Across three studies, we find that sufferers experience lower CAQ from responders who have (vs. have not) previously endured a similar distress. We examine three mechanisms that explain the negative effect of previously endured distress on CAQ, based on responders' self-focus, validation of sufferer's distress, and self-efficacy. We also examine the boundary conditions of this effect and find that it is distress specific. Specifically, this effect does not hold when responders who previously endured distress respond to sufferers who are currently enduring a different type of distress. These findings advance organizational research on compassion and inform efforts to improve people's capacity to alleviate distress at work.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
98
期刊介绍: The Journal of Organizational Behavior aims to publish empirical reports and theoretical reviews of research in the field of organizational behavior, wherever in the world that work is conducted. The journal will focus on research and theory in all topics associated with organizational behavior within and across individual, group and organizational levels of analysis, including: -At the individual level: personality, perception, beliefs, attitudes, values, motivation, career behavior, stress, emotions, judgment, and commitment. -At the group level: size, composition, structure, leadership, power, group affect, and politics. -At the organizational level: structure, change, goal-setting, creativity, and human resource management policies and practices. -Across levels: decision-making, performance, job satisfaction, turnover and absenteeism, diversity, careers and career development, equal opportunities, work-life balance, identification, organizational culture and climate, inter-organizational processes, and multi-national and cross-national issues. -Research methodologies in studies of organizational behavior.
×
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