Vera M. Schweitzer , Fabiola H. Gerpott , Wladislaw Rivkin , Jakob Stollberger
{"title":"(不)介意缝隙吗?信息差距加剧了好奇心,也助长了工作中的挫败感","authors":"Vera M. Schweitzer , Fabiola H. Gerpott , Wladislaw Rivkin , Jakob Stollberger","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Although information gaps frequently occur in the workplace, surprisingly little organizational research considered their psychological consequences for employees. We refine the information gap theory by integrating it with the cognitive-affective processing system (CAPS) framework to argue that work-related information gaps constitute a double-edged sword for work engagement because they elicit both specific curiosity and frustration. We find support for our cognitive-affective process model of information gaps across two experience-sampling studies and an experimental study. In Study 1 (74 employees, 270 days), we validated a work-related information gap scale to empirically disentangle information gaps from specific curiosity. In Study 2 (107 employees, 719 days), information gaps were positively associated with specific curiosity and frustration, which in turn had differential effects on work engagement. In Study 3 (405 employees across two conditions), we provide causal support for our model and rule out alternative cognitive (i.e., boredom) and affective (i.e., thriving) mechanisms.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"178 ","pages":"Article 104276"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(Don’t) mind the gap? Information gaps compound curiosity yet also feed frustration at work\",\"authors\":\"Vera M. Schweitzer , Fabiola H. Gerpott , Wladislaw Rivkin , Jakob Stollberger\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104276\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Although information gaps frequently occur in the workplace, surprisingly little organizational research considered their psychological consequences for employees. We refine the information gap theory by integrating it with the cognitive-affective processing system (CAPS) framework to argue that work-related information gaps constitute a double-edged sword for work engagement because they elicit both specific curiosity and frustration. We find support for our cognitive-affective process model of information gaps across two experience-sampling studies and an experimental study. In Study 1 (74 employees, 270 days), we validated a work-related information gap scale to empirically disentangle information gaps from specific curiosity. In Study 2 (107 employees, 719 days), information gaps were positively associated with specific curiosity and frustration, which in turn had differential effects on work engagement. In Study 3 (405 employees across two conditions), we provide causal support for our model and rule out alternative cognitive (i.e., boredom) and affective (i.e., thriving) mechanisms.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"volume\":\"178 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104276\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597823000523\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597823000523","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
(Don’t) mind the gap? Information gaps compound curiosity yet also feed frustration at work
Although information gaps frequently occur in the workplace, surprisingly little organizational research considered their psychological consequences for employees. We refine the information gap theory by integrating it with the cognitive-affective processing system (CAPS) framework to argue that work-related information gaps constitute a double-edged sword for work engagement because they elicit both specific curiosity and frustration. We find support for our cognitive-affective process model of information gaps across two experience-sampling studies and an experimental study. In Study 1 (74 employees, 270 days), we validated a work-related information gap scale to empirically disentangle information gaps from specific curiosity. In Study 2 (107 employees, 719 days), information gaps were positively associated with specific curiosity and frustration, which in turn had differential effects on work engagement. In Study 3 (405 employees across two conditions), we provide causal support for our model and rule out alternative cognitive (i.e., boredom) and affective (i.e., thriving) mechanisms.
期刊介绍:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context