Prior research on investor reactions to CEO communication tends to focus on one linguistic cue at a time. Even when multiple cues are considered, they are often examined in an additive fashion as if they were independent from one another. Integrating sensemaking theory and research with terror management theory, we develop a sensemaking model that posits that investors do not react to routine cues from CEOs, such as achievement expression, in isolation. Instead, their reactions are moderated by nonroutine cues such as CEOs' use of death-related words that trigger mortality salience. Under high mortality salience, CEO achievement expression indirectly enhances investors' perceptions of firm investment attractiveness through agentic leader stereotypes and perceived leader competence. Two experiments with investors (Studies 1 and 2) and a panel study of U.S. S&P 500 firms (Study 3) support our model, showing that CEO achievement expression elicits stronger, more positive investor reactions under high mortality salience.

Existing voice research tends to focus on the positive outcomes associated with promotive voice and the negative outcomes associated with prohibitive voice. We adopt a self-determination theoretical lens to examine what voicers stand to gain by engaging in both types of voice despite the potential backlash against them for their voice behavior (particularly prohibitive voice). We conducted two experience-sampling studies that examined the fluctuation of voice on a daily (Study 1) and weekly (Study 2) basis. In Study 1, we found that while promotive voice was positively associated with the voicer's psychological need satisfaction, prohibitive voice was not. In addition, the association between promotive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction was stronger than that of prohibitive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction. In Study 2, we found that both promotive voice and prohibitive voice were indirectly related to the voicer's authentic self-expression and helping behavior through the mediating mechanism of psychological need satisfaction, although the indirect effects of promotive voice were stronger than the indirect effects of prohibitive voice.

With the passage of cannabis-friendly legislation in the U.S., cannabis use is on the rise and poses increasing challenges to managing human resources in the workplace. However, the literature offers a limited understanding of its long-term implications for career outcomes. Drawing on social selection theory, we argue that cannabis use negatively influences one's extrinsic career outcomes (i.e., income and occupational prestige) over time via lowered job complexity. Furthermore, based on social causation theory, we propose an alternative model in which higher job complexity reduces cannabis use over time to facilitate one's extrinsic career outcomes. Using 8 years of longitudinal panel data from multiple sources, we found support for the hypothesized reciprocal effect between cannabis use and job complexity and their influences on income and occupational prestige. Moreover, the impact of job complexity on extrinsic career outcomes via cannabis use was stronger than the impact of cannabis use on extrinsic career outcomes via job complexity. We discuss this study's theoretical and practical implications for cannabis use and human resource management research and practice.

Most research on family demands has been conducted at the individual level, showing that they can negatively influence employees' abilities to manage the work-family interface. We challenge this existing paradigm by arguing that at the team level, family demands diversity (i.e., differences among members of the same team with respect to their family demands) can enable the entire team to better manage the work-family interface. Drawing on the categorization-elaboration model and social exchange theory, we found that family demands diversity was indirectly and positively related to team effort through team backup behavior and team work-to-family conflict, and these effects were stronger when team family identity was low and supervisor family support was high. We discuss the theoretical implications of our findings and the practical implications for HR policies and practices.

Drawing on interpersonal sensemaking theory, we propose a model to examine the effect of supervisory family support (SFS) on employees' knowledge sharing with coworkers and organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB). Using a time‐lagged design with data from 55 employee teams and their direct supervisors, we found that SFS was indirectly and positively related to employee OCB (but not knowledge sharing) through psychological need satisfaction and felt trust by the supervisor. We also found that SFS excess (a focal employee has higher levels of SFS relative to teammates) was associated with a higher level of psychological need satisfaction perceived by the focal employee than SFS deficiency (a focal employee has lower levels of SFS relative to teammates). These effects were indirectly and positively related to employee OCB via psychological need satisfaction and felt trust by the supervisor.

Integrating work-family conflict theory with family systems theory, we examine a potential dark side of parents' intrinsic work motivation by linking it to their work-to-family conflict (WFC) perceived by the adolescent at home. We hypothesize that the father's (mother's) intrinsic motivation may be positively related to his (her) WFC perceived by the adolescent. We additionally hypothesize that one spouse's WFC perceived by the adolescent is higher when his/her relative intrinsic motivation (to the other spouse) is higher. Finally, we examine gender egalitarianism (GE) as a moderator. Using data from 198 dual-earning heterosexual couples and their adolescent child from the 500-Family Project, we found strong support for the hypotheses pertaining to the father but no support for the hypotheses pertaining to the mother. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The literature on personality trait development has mainly focused on influences of life experiences in one single life domain (e.g., work or family) separate from one another and has primarily examined personality development in early life stages. Thus, less attention has been devoted to influences from interplays across different life domains and personality development in middle and late adulthood. Synthesizing the literature on personality science and organizational research, we built a theoretical model and investigated what, how, and why the interplay between two central life domains-work and family-may be related to personality trait development of people at their middle and late life stages, and more important, change-related reciprocal relationships between personality traits and work-family experiences. Generally, convergent findings with data from two longitudinal studies (National Survey of Midlife in the United States, maximum N = 3,192, three waves; and Health and Retirement Study, maximum N = 1,133, three waves except anxiety) revealed that work-to-family conflict, family-to-work conflict, work-to-family facilitation, and family-to-work facilitation mostly had lagged effects on changes of Conscientiousness, Extraversion, and Neuroticism, and the influences were generally channeled through changes of anxiety. Personality traits also had lagged influences on changes of work-family experiences, with some influences deteriorating over time. Change-related reciprocal relationships were recorded mainly between Neuroticism and Extraversion with work-family experiences. Some selection effects were larger than socialization effects. Our research contributes to the personality and the work-family literature and represents a useful example of cross-fertilization of research in different areas of psychology to advance personality research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Our research predicts different stakeholder engagement emphases through a CEO motivation-means contingency model. Drawing upon regulatory focus and power theories, we argue that higher levels of CEO prevention focus and informal power (firm experience, knowledge, and board connections) are associated with stronger primary stakeholder engagement, whereas higher levels of CEO promotion focus and formal power (CEO duality and equity ownership) are associated with stronger secondary stakeholder engagement. By analyzing a panel dataset of S&P 500 firms, we found support for our hypotheses. These findings accentuate our contributions by emphasizing the importance of considering both CEO motivation (regulatory focus) and means (power) to understand how CEOs' characteristics influence their firms' stakeholder engagement. Our study extends recent work in the strategy and upper echelons literatures by showing that executives' regulatory focus does not operate in a vacuum; rather, its effects on managerial decision-making and firm strategies are context-specific.

OBJECTIVE:Although past research has shown the negative consequences of state inauthenticity (i.e., the experience of inauthenticity), what triggers state inauthenticity remains to be better understood. We focus on leader Machiavellianism (Mach), defined as the extent to which leaders engage in unethical and manipulative behaviors to attain their goals, as a predictor of follower state inauthenticity. Drawing on the social misfit argument, we examined a model in which leader Mach, jointly with a perceived collectivistic work climate, determines follower state inauthenticity and subsequent work withdrawal.METHOD:We used a vignette-based lab study (303 participants from the United States) and a daily diary field study (476 daily responses from 69 participants recruited from China).RESULTS:Across two studies, we found that follower state inauthenticity mediated the relationship between leader Mach and follower work withdrawal. The positive relationship between leader Mach and follower state inauthenticity was strengthened by a perceived collectivistic work climate.CONCLUSIONS:The present research underlines the importance of the social environment in influencing follower state inauthenticity at work and shifts research attention from the consequences of state inauthenticity to its predictors.

Most studies to date have treated work-family conflict (WFC) as a static construct, typically using WFC measures collected at a single point in time to predict other variables either in the same data collection or in a follow-up collection. Drawing on conservation of resources theory, we used panel data spanning approximately 20 years to test a model in which the long-term relations between WFC change and four well-being variables—perceived health, self-esteem, income, and family support—are mediated by change in perceived control. Our results suggest that family-to-work conflict (FIW) change, but not work-to-family conflict (WIF) change, over a period of ten years was negatively associated with change in perceived control over 20 years. Change in perceived control in turn predicted lower levels of perceived health, self-esteem, income, and family support at the end of the 20-year period. We found little support for a proposition based on adaptation theory that initial levels of WFC are positively associated with subsequent levels of well-being.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths in the U.S. As chief strategists of their respective firms, how do Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) react to mortality salience associated with the number of new daily COVID deaths in the U.S.? To answer this question, we integrate terror management theory (TMT) with regulatory focus theory to examine how CEOs respond to mortality salience. Based on a sample of CEOs of S&P 500 firms, we found that mortality salience was associated with CEOs' increased other-orientation, and this association was more pronounced among those with high prevention focus. Mortality salience also was associated with CEOs' decreased self-orientation, particularly among those with high promotion focus. We also found that CEOs' self-orientation was negatively related to the likelihood of their firms' making community donations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrating affective events theory, work-family compensation, and moral balance theory, the present study proposes a model that examines how and when abusive supervisory behavior is related to employees' deviant behavior toward their supervisor. Using a diary method that involved two surveys per day over two weeks, we found support for our model based on 707 daily observations from 130 employees. Specifically, anger toward one's supervisor mediated the relationship between abusive supervisory behavior and deviant behavior toward one's supervisor. In addition, the degree to which employees engaged in deviant behavior toward their supervisor depended on their prior-day deviant behavior toward their family. When employees engaged in lower prior-day deviant behavior toward their family, anger toward their supervisor was positively related to subsequent deviant behavior toward their supervisor. In contrast, when employees had higher prior-day deviant behavior toward their family, the relationship between anger toward their supervisor and deviant behavior toward their supervisor was weaker. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for research on abusive supervision, work-family interface, and moral balance theory.

Crossover theory describes the transmission of stress/strains that are experienced by one person to another (Westman, Human Relations, 54, 2001, 717-752). In our article, we review the extant literature and present results from a meta-analysis-the first ever of this literature-to shed light on the magnitude of the crossover effect, the predictors and outcomes of crossover, and the psychological process underlying the crossover effect. Our meta-analysis offered evidence of crossover of the role sender's work stressors, work attitudes, and work-to-family conflict (WFC) to the role receiver's psychological distress, family satisfaction, and work attitudes. We also found some support for the hypothesis that the role sender's positive social behavior mediates these effects.

Attracting talent is one of the key challenges for organizations, and offering attractive work–family benefits plays an increasingly important role in succeeding at this challenge. However, behavioural decision theory suggests that when choosing among job offers with different work–family benefits, individuals may fall prey to a decoy effect and this effect may be mediated through anticipated regret. This effect occurs when preferences are influenced by a normatively irrelevant decoy option that is clearly inferior to one of the other options in the choice set, but not the other (i.e., ‘asymmetrically dominated’). Across two studies, we investigated preferences for two important types of work–family benefits: flexible work arrangements (FWA) and dependent care support (DCS). We predicted and found a decoy effect: Preferences for jobs with these benefits were influenced by the presence of a normatively irrelevant decoy option. That is, preferences shifted towards either the FWA option or the DCS option depending on which option the decoy targeted (i.e., the option that asymmetrically dominated the decoy). The effects held over and above variables related to individuals’ work and family situations and values, including role centrality. Moreover, we found that anticipated regret mediated the effect of the decoy option on benefit preferences.Practitioner points Organizations can use decoy options with relatively inferior (i.e., dominated) job benefits as an implicit influence tactic to influence applicants' job preferences. Using this approach is only legitimate if it has a factual basis and recruiters need to take ethical aspects of such practices into consideration. Individuals need to be aware that when normatively irrelevant cues such as decoy options affect their decision‐making process, their choices may be biased. By noticing decoy options and influence attempts of recruiters, individuals can ensure that their choices reflect their values, not contextual factors.

Correspondence AndrewLi,DepartmentofManagement,Marketing, andGeneralBusiness,WestTexasA&M University,CC213H,Canyon, Texas. Email: ali@wtamu.edu Abstract This study proposed amodel in which employee general mental ability (GMA) and conscientiousness are linked to work–family conflict and enrichment through their relationship with occupational prestige and coping styles. We evaluated this model in a sample of 709 working adults from the National Survey of Midlife Development II in the United States. Results indicate that, through occupational prestige and subsequent psychological job demands and financial well-being, GMA was related to work-to-family conflict (WFC) and family-to-work conflict (FWC). GMA was also related to work-tofamily enrichment (WFE) but not family-to-work enrichment (FWE) through occupational prestige and autonomy. In contrast, conscientiousness did not influence work–family outcomes through occupational prestige. Additionally, GMA and conscientiousness were both related to WFE/FWE through problem coping, whereas conscientiousness was related to FWC through avoidance coping. Examining the relative effects ofGMAand conscientiousness,we found that the indirect effects ofGMAthroughoccupational prestigewere stronger than those of conscientiousness, whereas the indirect effects of conscientiousness through problem coping were stronger than those of GMA. We discuss our findings in terms of the mechanisms through which stable individual differences may exert influences on work– family outcomes.

SummaryAcross 3 studies, we apply a self‐protection perspective of observed mistreatment to examine a moderated mediation model on “when” and “why” third parties are motivated by peer abusive supervision. We hypothesize that prevention‐focused third parties will increase their performance effort as a response to peer abusive supervision, and this effect is mediated by performance instrumentality. In a field study of working adults (Study 1) and an experimental study that manipulated peer abusive supervision (Study 2), we found that peer abusive supervision interacted with third parties' prevention focus to predict their performance effort such that peer abuse was positively related to third parties' performance effort only for those high on prevention focus. Results were replicated in a second field study of working adults (Study 3). Further, we found support for the mediating effect of performance instrumentality. The theoretical and practical implications of our results are discussed.

Past research on the effects of employees' use of work-family support policies tends to draw on a depletion perspective suggesting that using these policies may reduce work-family conflict. The emphasis on depletion fails to consider the expansion perspective that assumes that using work resources may enrich family functioning. Using a sample of 113 matched employee-supervisor pairs and a 1-month separation between predictor and criterion measurement, we found support for the expansion rather than the depletion perspective. Specifically, the relationships between support policy use and employee job satisfaction and family efficacy (but not organisational citizenship behaviour) were mediated by work-to-family enrichment; these effects were realised only for employees with high levels of family identity. In contrast, no support was found for family-to-work conflict as a mediator of the model.

The family support literature tends to draw on a level paradigm focusing on support from a particular source over time. In the present study, we take the event paradigm (or the episodic approach) which treats family support provisions as specific encounters. Specifically, we draw on the moral licensing literature to examine why, when, and how individuals' prior moral action influences the provision of family support in three studies. In Studies 1a and 1b, we found that individuals who engaged in a prior moral action provided less family support in comparison to those who did not engage in a prior moral action. In Study 2, we found that the indirect effects of engaging in a prior moral action on family support provision as mediated by individuals' counterfactual thinking were observed only when situational severity was low. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.

Researchers have paid limited attention to what makes organizational authority figures decide to treat their employees either justly or unjustly. Drawing from the actor-focused model of justice, as well as the stereotype content model, we argue that employee conscientiousness and agreeableness can impact the extent to which supervisors adhere to normative rules for distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice, as a result of supervisors' evaluations of their employees' effort and their liking of the employees. Supervisory compliance with justice rules may, in turn, impact the extent to which employees judge themselves to be treated either justly or unjustly. We tested these possibilities in 3 studies. In Study 1, we utilized a meta-analysis to demonstrate positive relationships between employees' conscientiousness, agreeableness, and their justice perceptions. In Study 2, we conducted 3 experiments to test the causal relationship between employee personality and supervisor intentions to comply with justice rules. In Study 3, we conducted an employee-supervisor dyadic field survey to examine the entire mediation model. Results are discussed in terms of the potential roles that both employees and supervisors may play in shaping employees' justice perceptions. (PsycINFO Database Record

Scholarly inquiries into the prominent role that leaders play in influencing their followers' work-family experiences have flourished in recent decades. Despite this encouraging progress, researchers have criticized the current state of the literature, lamenting that the study of leader behaviors in the work-family literature is either incomplete or oversimplified. To move the field forward, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to take stock of what we know, identify what is still unknown, and chart a path forward for future research. We organize the literature linking leadership to employees' work-family experience based on a four-category framework of leader behavior (task, relationship, change, and ethical/unethical). We summarize what effects leader behaviors may have on their followers, how such effects occur, and the boundary conditions of these effects. We conclude our review by identifying both theoretical and methodological gaps that can inform future leadership research in the work-family domain.