• No results found

‘The Antecedents of Ostracizing behavior and the influence of Neuroticism’

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "‘The Antecedents of Ostracizing behavior and the influence of Neuroticism’"

Copied!
29
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

‘The Antecedents of Ostracizing behavior and the influence of

Neuroticism’

 

Abstract: Despite the large number of studies devoted to examining the consequences of ostracism (the act of ignoring and excluding another person), there is a significant gap in the literature: the antecedents of ostracism. Relying on compensatory control theory, this paper identifies job insecurity and neuroticism as antecedents of ostracism and argues that employees who experience job insecurity will involve in ostracizing behavior, especially when they have a highly neurotic personality. They do so because they feel threatened in their sense of control, and ostracism is one way in which people can restore such feelings of control. Results from this field study support the hypothesis that neuroticism moderates the positive relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior. More specifically, for highly neurotic individuals, job insecurity resulted in more engagement in ostracizing behavior.

Keywords: Ostracism ︎! Job Insecurity ! Neuroticism

Master Human Resource Management University of Groningen

Faculty of Economics and Business

Student: Marian Ellyne Zeegers Student number: S2987740 Supervisor: J. Oedzes Word count: 5857

(2)

1. INTRODUCTION

Ostracism is defined as the act of excluding and ignoring another person (Williams, 2001). Research suggests that ostracism is pervasive, powerful and a common occurrence in everyday life. In a study among 2,000 Americans, 67% reported having used ostracism and 75% reported having been ostracized during their lifetime (Faulkner, Williams, Sherman and Williams, 1997). Since ostracism is such a powerful and widely occurring phenomenon in everyday life, a proliferation of research focused on identifying the consequences of ostracism (Williams, 2007). A common finding is that ostracism is painful, both psychologically and physically to those who experience it (Williams, 2009). Ostracism results in sadness, anger, loneliness, and threatens the fundamental needs of the person who is ostracized (Baumeister and Leary, 1995; Bingham, 2000; Williams, 2007).

Despite the large number of studies devoted to examining the impact of ostracism on the target (i.e., the person being ostracized), little progress has been made in researching the antecedents of the sender (i.e., the person who is ostracizing someone else) to involve in ostracizing behavior (Williams, 2007). In other words, it is unclear which situations either stimulate or prevent individuals to engage in ostracism. The current paper will focus on this issue, by identifying antecedents of ostracizing behavior.

(3)

(Storseth, 2006). Compensatory control theory suggests, however, that when people have no control over the threats in one domain, they often try to restore feelings of control in unrelated but available domains. In other words, this theory explains that in times of threatened personal control, people will try to compensate these feelings of threat with gaining control in other domains (Kay, Gaucher, Callan, Napier and Laurin, 2008). Based on this theoretical backdrop, I argue that people who face job insecurity and as such, feel threatened in their feelings of control, will involve in ostracizing behavior to restore those feelings (cf: Kraimer, Liden, Sparrowe and Wayne, 2005; Nezlek et al., 2015).

Interestingly, even though all people experience threat and a reduction of personal control as a consequence of job insecurity, people do not have the same perception and sense of threats, due to their personality. More specifically, people with a highly neurotic personality, have a greater sense of threats and punishments compared to people who are less neurotic (Gallagher, 1990). Therefore, I assume that the situation of decreased personal control, due to job insecurity, will be more threatening to people with a highly neurotic personality. People with a low neurotic personality, are more confident, steady and secure (Goldberg, 1990). As a result, the feeling of decreased control, due to job insecurity, will be less threatening to people with a low neurotic personality than to people with a highly neurotic personality. Therefore, I propose that neuroticism moderates the relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior such that people involve in ostracizing behavior when they face job insecurity, and more often when they have a highly neurotic personality.

(4)

understanding of the underlying reasons of why people engage in such negative and often harmful behavior.

The findings will also have practical merit in the workplace. By identifying job insecurity as the main driver of ostracism, I demonstrate that ostracism occurs as a result of feelings of threat. So, when a company is not able to provide stable employment, and the employees perceive threat related to job insecurity, they could involve in ostracizing behavior. By using a big-5 personality test (Barrick and Mount, 1993) in the hiring procedure companies could measure and know which employees have a highly neurotic personality. When these highly neurotic persons are confronted with job insecurity they will more often involve in ostracism than people with a low neurotic personality. Companies could recognize this pattern and help the employees to cope with their insecurity, for instance by having more performance appraisals (cf: Gallie, Felstead, Green and Inanc, 2016). In this way, companies could counteract ostracizing behavior before it harms the co-workers and the achievement of the organizational goals.

(5)

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

The relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior

Ostracism is defined as the act of excluding and ignoring another person (Williams, 2001). Workplace ostracism consists of simple and subtle acts. Giving a silent treatment and giving the cold shoulder are some typical examples of ostracizing behavior observed in the workplace (Zheng, Yang, Ngo, Liu and Jiao, 2016). The silent treatment is a way through which a person can decisively socially exclude another by withholding acknowledgment of that person. This example of ostracizing behavior is often used to interpersonally punish or bully a colleague, in the presence of others (Fox and Stallworth, 2005; Williams and Sommers, 1997). More specific examples of ostracism include not inviting a colleague to lunch or a social activity, ignoring a colleague during meetings, avoiding eye contact with a colleague, or walking by a colleague without offering a customary greeting. These subtle acts of ostracism can be difficult to spot in organizations (Scott and Duffy, 2015) and are ways to control the environment or an individual specifically, because ostracizing robs the target from a sense of control over their interactions with others (Williams and Sommers, 1997).

Theories on the antecedents and consequences of ostracism suggest that people are most likely to engage in ostracism when they experience feelings of threat (Nezlek et al., 2015). Other group members can pose a threat by displaying deviate behavior or having a popular status in the eyes of the ostracizer. One of the most important sources of threat for employees is job insecurity (Liu et al., 2016).

(6)

threatened (Kay et al., 2008). Due to the fact that employees have no input into the decision regarding their job continuity, their uncertainty increases and their personal control decreases (Liu et al., 2016; De Witte, 1999). Based on the compensatory control theory, I argue that people will restore these feelings of uncertainty and decreased personal control by engaging in ostracism.

A reduction of personal control results in feelings of randomness and chaos. These feelings of chaos can be psychologically stressful, traumatic, and anxiety provoking (Kay et al., 2008). Massé (2000) described psychological distress as “a crisis of the self, which occurs when the individual attempts, but fails, to adjust or control important life or environmental elements resulting in an inability to emotionally self-regulate”. A way to deal with the psychological distress and the decreased feelings of personal control is described in the compensatory control theory. This theory suggests that when people experience uncertainty and have no control over the threat in one domain, they will try to restore feelings of control in unrelated but available domains (Kay et al., 2008). Ostracizing someone entails controlling a social contact in the most basic sense – ignoring that a contact exists or ending it (Nezlek et al., 2015). As a consequence, ostracizing others results in an increased sense of personal control in the social domain.

(7)

H1: Job insecurity is positively related to ostracizing behavior. The moderating role of neuroticism

Neuroticism refers to the tendency to experience negative feelings such as anxiety, embarrassment, anger, mood swings, depression and low self- esteem (Costa and McCrae, 1992). People with a highly neurotic personality have a greater sense of threats and punishments (Gallagher, 1990). These threats could be real or imaginary threats (Carver and White, 1994; Elliot and Thrash, 2002; Zelenski and Larsen, 1999). Moreover, data from cognitive psychology have shown that individuals scoring high on neuroticism tend to have a negative interpretation bias, which represents the tendency to interpret ambiguous information in a threatening way (Andric, Maric, Knezevic, Mihaljevic, Mirjanic, Velthorst and Os, 2016). People with a low neurotic personality are more confident, steady and secure (Goldberg, 1990). Consequently, people with a low neurotic personality will have a less threatening perception of the world than people with a highly neurotic personality.

(8)

highly neurotic personality, low job insecurity will not be problematic but high job insecurity results in an extremely stressful situation. These individuals will become especially worried about what to do when they become unemployed and how hard it will be to find a new job (Ashford, Lam, Lee and Liang, 2015). This uncertainty about their future will be complemented with their usual negative feelings of worrying, nervousness and emotional insecurity. Based on the compensatory theory, the highly neurotic persons will try to compensate the lowered levels of personal control in one domain, by gaining control in another domain (Kay et al., 2008). A way of gaining personal control in another domain is ostracizing behavior. Therefore, highly neurotic persons will engage more frequently in ostracism when they experience loss of personal control as a consequence of job insecurity (Nezlek et al., 2015).

For people who score low on neuroticism, however, high job insecurity will most likely be perceived as not that threatening. These individuals experience uncertainty about their future, but their personality gives them the tools to cope with this uncertainty, and to appraise the situation as not that threatening. Therefore, even when they are confronted with high job insecurity, people with a low neurotic personality will not involve more often in ostracizing behavior. To conclude, this paper assumes that people who experience job insecurity will involve in ostracism, especially when they have a highly neurotic personality. Therefore, the second hypothesis is:

(9)

+

+

Figure 1. Conceptual Model 3. METHOD

Data collection

The recruiters for data collection were four Dutch students from the university of Groningen. In the first phase of the data collection, the researchers approached sixty teams of diverse companies to participate in the study. By approaching the teams, all employees received e-mail with a short introduction of the research, examples of questions that will be asked in the survey, and information about the confidentiality of the research. Moreover, the participants were made aware of the fact that the data collection was strictly confidential and the data was anonymized after collection in order to make sure that individuals, teams, departments and organizations cannot be traced. The teams consisted of at least three employees and one leader. All participants who agreed individually to participate in the study moved to the second phase of data collection: the online questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed with the online survey tool called Qualtrics and disseminated via e-mail. The time to fill in the survey was 10-15 minutes and the participants responded individually using a computer, laptop, tablet or mobile

Neuroticism

(10)

phone. The questionnaire contained questions about neuroticism, job insecurity and ostracizing behavior. The collected data for this study was analysed by making use of IBM SPSS 23.0.

Sample

(11)

education, 52 participants (36.4%) completed University of Applied Sciences, 8 (5.6%) participants completed University Bachelor, and 30 (21%) participants completed University Master, at the moment of filling in the survey.

Measurement instrument

As the study was conducted in an International and Dutch speaking environment, all measures previously developed in English were translated into Dutch using a standard back-translation procedure to make sure all questions were understood properly by Dutch respondents (Brislin, 1970).

Job insecurity. Job insecurity was measured on a 7-point response scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). Items to measure job security, the independent variable, (Catalano, Dooley and Rook, 1987) included: “I am certain I will have a job at this company a year from now”, “I worry a great deal about company downsizing”, and “I often wonder about my job security”. The statement “I am certain I will have a job at this company a year from now” is phrased in the opposite direction, and therefore recoded. The reliability analysis on the three questions measuring job insecurity revealed that the three items together had a α = 0.70.

(12)

team members as if they aren’t there”, “Not inviting or asking team members if they want anything when you went out for a coffee”. Reliability analysis on the ten questions measuring ostracism revealed that the ten items together had a α = 0.90.

Neuroticism. Neuroticism was measured on a 7-point response scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). Items to measure neuroticism, the moderator, (IPIP) included: “I get stressed out easily”, “I am relaxed most of the time”, “I worry easily about things”. “I seldom feel blue”, “I am easily disturbed”, “I get upset easily”, “I change my mood a lot”, “I get irritated easily”, “I often feel blue” and “I have frequent mood swings”. The statements “I am relaxed most of the time” and “I seldom feel blue” are phrased in the opposite direction, and therefore recoded. Reliability analysis on the ten questions measuring neuroticism revealed that the ten items together had a α = 0.84.

Control Variables. In order to accurately test the hypotheses, I included several demographic factors that could affect the outcome variables. First, personality traits develop over time. Furthermore, levels of neuroticism decrease with age. Specifically, levels of neuroticism are higher in late adolescence than in adulthood (Costa and McCrae, 2006). Therefore, the first control variable controlled for age.

(13)

“0” for male.

After exploring the dataset, correlation analysis, reliability analysis, and computing the variables, I analyzed the descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, correlations). Furthermore, I investigated whether there was significant group-level variance to see whether a multilevel regression analysis was necessary, based on the group-level nature of the data. Results of this regression demonstrated that there was no significant group level variance (var = .00, SE = .00). Based on this finding, I performed the hypothesis test using regular regression procedures with the process macro by Hayes (2013). Predictor variables, job insecurity and neuroticism, were standardized.

4. RESULTS

Descriptive statistics and Correlations

(14)

This study controlled for several demographic factors, such as age and gender, that could influence the hypothesized relationships. First, the control variable gender did not significantly correlate with the other variables. This is surprising, because based on the research by Benenson et al. (2008), I expected that there were some gender differences in the ostracizing behavior. Furthermore, a correlation analysis showed that the control variable age did significantly correlate with neuroticism (r = -.31**, p < 0.01). This supports the research of Costa and McCrae (2006) who say that levels of neuroticism are higher in late adolescence than in adulthood.

Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and zero-order Pearson Correlations

Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. Age 2. Gender 3. Job Insecurity 37.33 .56 2.53 12.66 .50 1.25 - .04 -.12 - .03 - 4. Neuroticism 2.90 0.92 .31** -.05 .20* - 5. Ostracism 1.28 0.54 -.18* -.12 .19* .35** - N = 143; * p <0.05; ** p < 0.01. Regression analysis

(15)

analyze whether the result of this regression are still significant by adding the variable neuroticism, I performed a regression analysis with job insecurity and neuroticism regressed on ostracizing behavior (controlled by age). The results of this regression show that the positive relationship between job insecurity and ostracism is not significant anymore (R2 = .14, B = .07, p > .05). Neuroticism regressed on ostracizing behavior (controlled by age) show that there is a significant positive relationship between neuroticism and ostracizing behavior (R2 = .14, B = .16,

p < .00). People with a highly neurotic personality will involve more often in ostracizing behavior. This implies that the significant relationship between job insecurity and ostracism is partly driven by neuroticism and therefore I found no evidence to support hypothesis 1.

Table 2. Regression Analysis

OSTRACIZING BEHAVIOR

Predictor Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4

B SE P B SE P B SE P B SE P Control: Age -.01 .00 .03* -.01 .00 .06 -.00 .00 .40 -.00 .00 .65 Main: Job insecurity .09 .05 .04* .07 .04 .14 .05 .04 .23 neuroticism .16 .05 .00*** .16 .04 .00*** IV X MOD .14 .04 .00*** R2 .03 .06 .14 .22 Δ R2 .03 .03 .08 .08

(16)

Hypothesis 2: Neuroticism moderates the positive relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior. In order to analyze whether or not the interaction term (job insecurity x neuroticism) influences ostracizing behavior, I performed a regression analysis with the interaction term regressed on ostracizing behavior. The results of this regression, as shown in table 2, demonstrate that there is a significant moderation effect (R2 = .22, B = 0.14, p < .00). The interaction term does influence ostracizing behavior.

The graph and simple slope analysis, as shown in figure 2, demonstrate that for people with a highly neurotic personality, there is a positive significant relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior (B = .19, SE = .05, p < .00). Moreover, for people who score low on neuroticism the relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior is not significant (B = -.08, SE = .06, p > .05). So, in line with the hypothesis, I found a stronger positive relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior for those who have a highly neurotic personality. To conclude, the results of the simple slope analysis support hypothesis 2, indicating that neuroticism moderates the positive relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior. 1 1,5 2 2,5 3

Low Job Insecurity High Job Insecurity

(17)

Figure 2. The moderating effect of neuroticism on the relationship between job insecurity and ostracizing behavior.

5. DISCUSSION

Hypotheses and Findings

The main goal of this study was to gain more insight in situations, which either stimulate or prevent individuals to engage in ostracism, by identifying antecedents of ostracizing behavior. I expected a positive relationship between job insecurity and ostracism, and a moderating effect of neuroticism. The regression analysis supported the second hypothesis, that for highly neurotic individuals, job insecurity resulted in more engagement in ostracizing behavior.

Theoretical Implications

The results demonstrated that not job insecurity but neuroticism had a significant positive main effect on ostracism. This result suggests that personality of the individuals may be a more important predictor of ostracizing behavior compared to more situational variables like job insecurity – in terms of main effects. This finding is in line with theory by Barrick and Mount (2005), who say that people should care about personality because it is meaningfully related to many work-related behaviors, such as success in groups and counterproductive behavior, e.g. ostracism.

(18)

Specifically, highly neurotic persons generally appraise events or other group members more threatening than people with a low neurotic personality (Hemenover and Dienstbier, 1996; Nezlek, et al., 2015). As a result, highly neurotic persons will more often engage in ostracizing behavior than people with a low neurotic personality.

Another explanation for the main effect of neuroticism on ostracizing behavior could be that neurotic individuals simply have lower quality relations with their colleagues, as a result of the lower fit between them (Barrick, Mitchell and Steward, 2003; Johnson, 2003), which results in more engagement in ostracizing behavior. Highly neurotic individuals are more irritable and more prone to interpersonal conflict (Bolger and Zuckerman, 1995; Costa and McCrae, 1992). They often express negative attitudes towards their colleagues and have lower quality interactions with them than low neurotic personalities have (LePine and Van Dyne, 2001; Peeters, Rutte, Tuijl and Reymen, 2006). High quality interactions lead to a shared view about individual responsibilities and how things should be done. Importantly, it builds up trust and belief in other people’s capabilities and good intentions (Drury, 2016). On the contrary, lower quality interactions lead to different views, distrust and perhaps less good intentions. As a consequence, the lower quality interactions will negatively influence the fit with other employees (Barrick et al., 2003). Due to the lower fit, highly neurotic persons will perceive other employees as more threatening. Based on these perceived feelings of threat, they will involve in ostracizing behavior.

(19)

simple slope analysis suggested that when job insecurity increases, ostracizing behavior increases, but only when people had a highly neurotic personality. This finding suggests that a change in the environment in combination with personality triggered people to engage in ostracizing behavior. All in all, these results provide new knowledge and insights in which situations stimulate individuals to engage in ostracism.

Practical Implications

(20)

companies could measure and know which employees have a highly neurotic personality. When these highly neurotic persons are confronted with job insecurity they will more often involve in ostracism than people with a low neurotic personality. If organizations want to improve work performance and reduce counterproductive behavior, such as ostracism, they must recognize this pattern. They could help the employees to cope with their insecurity by having more performance appraisals (cf: Gallie, Felstead, Green and Inanc, 2016) and counteract ostracizing behavior before it harms the co-workers and the achievement of the organizational goals. Furthermore, companies could prevent feelings of threat and loss of control due to job insecurity by taking care about employees’ perception of job insecurity. A possible solution is creating job security, by providing long-term contracts instead of temporary contracts (Liu et al., 2016). As a result, job insecurity decreases, and for highly neurotic persons the involvement in ostracizing behavior will decrease as well. At the end, it benefits both the company and the employees (Liu et al., 2016).

Limitations and future research

(21)

work-oriented goals (Zheng et al., 2016). When this counterproductive behavior is noted at the company, it could result in job insecurity. Therefore, the cross-sectional data forms a concern and I strongly encourage researchers interested in ostracism to employ longitudinal or experiment designs as well.

Second, despite the fact that the results were anonymous, there is a chance that a social desirability bias came up. This means that questions could have been answered in a manner that would have been viewed favorably by others (Crone & Marlowe, 1960). This is especially the case for a sensitive subject, like ostracism.

Third, the current study did not test the mediating mechanisms of why job insecure and neurotic individuals engage most strongly in ostracism. The theoretical rationale of this paper suggests a reduction of control as an important motive, which could serve as a mediator of the effect. I did not examine this motive, based on the assumption that feelings of threat and control are often subconscious. That is, people are aware of the negative feelings they have, but they do not direct these feelings as a motive why they engage in ostracizing behavior. Future research might consider ways in which to uncover such motives and whether it is something that can be deliberately managed.

(22)

Conclusion

(23)

REFERENCES

Andric, S. Maric, N.P., Knezevic, G., Mihaljevic, M., Mirjanic, T., Velthorst, E. and Os, J.

(2016) ‘Neuroticism and facial emotion recognition in healthy adults’, Early Intervention in

Psychiatry, 10, pp. 160-174.

Ashford, S.J., Lam, C.F., Lee, C. and Liang, J. (2015) ‘Job Insecurity and Organizational Citizenship Behavior’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, pp. 499-510.

Barrick, M.R., Mitchell, T.R. and Stewart, G.L. (2003) ‘Situational and motivational influences on trait-behavior relationships’, Personality and work: Reconsidering the role of

personality in organizations, pp. 60-82.

Barrick, M.R. and Mount, M.K. (1993) ‘Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the big five personality dimensions and job performance’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, pp. 111-118.

Barrick, M.R. and Mount, M.K. (2005) ‘Yes Personality Matters, Moving on to more Important Matters’, Human Performance, 18 (4), pp. 359-372.

Baumeister, R.F. and Leary, M.R. (1995) ‘The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation’, Psychological Bulletin, 117, pp. 497-529.

Beard, K.M. and Edwards, J.R. (1995) ‘Employees at risk: contingent work and the psychological experience of contingent workers’, Trends in Organizational Behavior, 2, pp. 109-126. Benenson, J.F., Markovits, H., Thompson, M.E., and Wrangham, R.W. (2011) ‘Under threat of

social exclusion, females exclude more than males’, Psychological Science, 22 (4), pp. 538-544.

(24)

Bernhard-Oettel, C., Sverke, M. and De Witte, H. (2005) ‘Comparing three alternative types of employment with permanent full-time work: how do employment contract and perceived job conditions relate to health complaints’, Work and Stress, 19, pp. 301-318.

Bingham, M. (2000) ‘Suddenly One Sunday’ (2nd ed.). Pymble, NSW: HarperCollins.

Bolger, N. and Zuckerman, A. (1995) ‘A framework for studying personality in the stress process’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, pp. 890-902.

Brewster, C., Mayne, L. and Tregaskis, O. (1997) ‘Flexible working in Europe’. Journal of World Business, 32 (2), pp. 133-151.

Brislin, R.W. (1970) ‘Back-translation for cross-cultural research’, Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 1(3), pp. 185-216.

Burgess, J. and Connell, J. (2006) ‘Temporary work and human resource management: issues, challenges and responses’, Personnel Review, 35 (2), pp. 129-140.

Carver, C.S. and White, T.L. (1994) ‘Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: the BIS/BAS Scales’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, pp. 319-333.

Catalano, R., Dooley, D. and Rook, K. (1987) ‘Job and non-job stressors and their moderators’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 60, pp. 115-132.

Costa, P.T. and McCrae, R.R. (1992) ‘Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI)’, Professional Manual, Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Costa, P.T. and McCrae, R.R. (2006) ‘Age changes in Personality and Their Origins’, Psychological Bulletin, 132 (1), pp. 26-28.

(25)

Cuyper, N., Jong, J., De Witte, H., Isaksson, K., Rigotti, T. and Schalk, R. (2008) ‘Literature review of theory and research on the psychological impact of temporary employment: Towards a conceptual model’, International Journal of Management Review, 10 (1), pp. 25-51.

Cuyper, N., Outtel, C.B., Berntson, E., Witte, H. and Alarco, B. (2008) ‘Employability and Employees’ Well-Being mediated by Job Insecurity’, Applied Psychology, 57, pp. 488-509.

De Witte, H. (1999) ‘Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the literature and the exploration of some unresolved issues’, European Journal of Work and

Organizational Psychology, 8, pp. 155-177.

De Witte, H. and Näswall, K. (2003) ‘Objective vs. subjective job insecurity: Consequences of temporary work for job satisfaction and organizational commitment in four European countries’, Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24, pp. 149-188.

Drury, P. (2016) ‘The unseen costs of flexible working; Why using temporary contract workers can strain workgroup relationships’, Human resource Management International Digest, 24 (4), pp. 23-25.

Elliot, A.J. and Thrash, T.M. (2002) ‘Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: approach and avoidance temperaments and goals’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, pp. 804-818.

Faulkner, S., Williams, K., Sherman, B. and Williams, E. (1997) ‘The “silent treatment”: Its incidence and impact’, Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.

Felstead, A. and Gallie, D. (2004) ‘For better or worse? Non-standard jobs and high involvement work systems.’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, pp. 1293-1316.

(26)

the workplace ostracism scale’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, pp. 1348-1366. Fox, S. and Stallworth, L.E. (2005) ‘Racial/ethnic bullying: Exploring links between bullying and

racism in the US workplace’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, pp. 438-456.

Gallagher, D.J. (1990) ‘Extraversion, neuroticism and appraisal of stressful academic events’, Personality and Individual Differences, 11, pp. 1053-1057.

Gallie, D., Felstead, A., Green, F. and Inanc, H. (2016) ‘The hidden face of job insecurity’, Work, Employment and Society, 1, pp. 1-18.

Goldberg, L.R. (1990) ‘An alternative ‘description of personality: the Big-Five factor structure’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, pp. 1216-1229.

Hayes, A.F. (2013) ‘Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: a Regression-based approach’, New York: Guilford Press.

Hemenover, S.H. and Dienstbier, R. (1996) ‘Prediction of Stress Appraisals from Mastery, Extraversion, Neuroticism, and general Appraisal Tendencies’, Motivation and Emotion, 20 (4), pp. 299-317.

Ijzermans, T. and Dirkx, C. (2009) ‘Beren op de weg spinsels in je hoofd’. Zaltbommel: Thema. IPIP (2017). ‘The Items in Each of the Preliminary IPIP Scales Measuring Constructs Similar to

Those in the 5 NEO-PI-R Broad Domains’. Available at:

http://ipip.ori.org/newNEODomainsKey.htm (Accessed: January 22, 2017).

Johnson, J.W. (2003) ‘Toward a better understanding of the relationship between personality and individual job performance’, Personality and work: Reconsidering the role of personality in organizations, 1, pp. 83-120.

Kalleberg, A.L., Reynolds, J. and Marsden, P.V. (2003) ‘Externalizing employment: flexible staffing arrangements in US organizations’, Social Science Research, 32, pp. 525-552. Kay, A.C., Gaucher, D., Callan, M.J., Napier, J.L. and Laurin, K. (2008) ‘God and the

(27)

systems’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5 (1), pp. 18-35.

Kraimer, M.L., Liden, R.C., Sparrowe, R.T. and Wayne, S.J. (2005) ‘The role of job security in understanding the relationship between employees’ perceptions of temporary workers and employees’ performance’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, pp. 389-398.

LePine, J.A. and Van Dyne, L. (2001) ‘Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: evidence of differential relationships with Big Five personality characteristics and cognitive ability’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, pp. 326-336. Liu, S., Liu, X., Luo, H., Ma, B. and Wang, H. (2016) ‘Linking Procedural Justice with

Employees Work outcomes in China: The Mediating Role of Job Security’, Social Indic. Res., 125, pp. 77-88.

Massé, R. (2000) ‘Qualitative and quantitative analyses of psychological distress:

Methodological complementary and ontological incommensurability’, Qualitative Health Research, 10(3), pp. 411-423.

Matusik, S.F. and Hill, C.W. (1998) ‘The utilization of contingent work, knowledge creation, and competitive advantage’, Academy of Management Review, 23, pp. 680-697.

Mauno, S. and Kinnunen, U. (2002) ‘Perceived job insecurity among dual earner couples: do its antecedents vary according to gender, economic sector and the measure used’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, pp. 295-314.

Nezlek, J.B., Wesselman, E.D., Wheeler, L. and Williams, K.D. (2015) ‘Ostracism in Everyday Life: The effects of Ostracism on Those Who Ostracize’, The Journal of Social

Psychology, 155, pp. 432-451.

Peeters, M., Rutte, H., Tuijl, M. and Reymen, I. (2006) ‘The Big Five personality traits and individual satisfaction with the team’, Small Group Research, 37, pp. 187-211.

(28)

Organization, 40(1), pp. 74-91.

Scott, K.L. and Duffy, M.K. (2015) ‘Antecedents of workplace ostracism: New directions in research and intervention’, Research in occupational Stress and Well Being, 13, pp. 137-165.

Storseth, F. (2006) ‘Changes at Work and Employee Reactions: Organizational Elements, Job Insecurity, and Short-Term Stress as Predictors for Employee Health and

Safety’. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47, pp. 541-550.

Twenge J.M, Baumeister R.F., Tice D.M. and Stucke T.S. (2001) ‘If you can’t join them, beat them: effects of social exclusion on aggressive behavior’, Journal Pers. Social

Psychology, 81, pp. 1058-1069.

Van Breukelen, W. and Allegro, J. (2000) ‘Effecten van een nieuwe vorm van flexibilisering van de arbeid. Een onderzoek in de logistieke sector’, Gedrag en Organisatie, 13 (2), pp. 107-125.

Von Hippel, C., Mangum, S.L., Greenberger, D.B., Heneman, R.L. and Skoglind, J.D. (1997) ‘Temporary employment: can organizations and employees both win’, Academy of Management Executive, 11(1), pp. 93-104.

Vosko, L.F. (1998) ‘Regulating precariousness? The temporary employment relationship under the NAFTA and the EC treaty’, Industrial Relations, 53 (1).

Whitbourne, S.K. and Waterman, A.S. (1979) ‘Psychosocial development during the adult years: Age and cohort comparisons’, Developmental Psychology, 15, pp. 373-37.

Williams, K.D. (2001) ‘Ostracism: The Power of Silence’. New York: Guilford. Williams, K.D. (2007) ‘Ostracism’, Annual Review of Psychology, 58, pp. 425-452. Williams, K.D. (2009) ‘Ostracism: Effects of being excluded and ignored’, Advances in

experimental social psychology, 41, pp. 275-314.

(29)

to Loafing or Compensation?, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 (7), pp. 693-706.

Zelenski, J.M. and Larsen, R.J. (1999) ‘Susceptibility to affect: a comparison of three personality taxonomies’, Journal of Personality, 67, pp. 761-791.

Zheng, X., Yang, J., Ngo, H., Liu, X. and Jiao, W. (2016) ‘Workplace Ostracism and Its Negative Outcomes’, Journal of Personnel Psychology, 15 (4), pp. 143-151.

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

Although the comprehensive approach lays the guidelines for interaction between military and civilian actors, the amount of civilian actors currently participating in

Preeti She doesn’t have a bad experience with caste, because she, to villagers she says ‘Yes, I am a Dalit, I am a good person, a good community people person, so who believes

Because of these motivations, China does not take into consideration issues of governance or political stability of the recipient nation, and thus the results of Chinese

Sure, you could go to the terms of conquer, invade, colonize, but where is the image that persists? The speech is that this territory is concerned because Bolivia does not meet the

Through reading the policy documents and analyzing the two interviews with policy-makers, I identified six main problems represented to be: (1)Low-education and Dutch language delays

How does access to different social capital (informal groups) and human capital (skills) contribute to the self-perceived employability of millennials in

The estimate for the coefficient with a lag of three year can be explained on the following way: In a country with one million inhabitants, where in a certain year one

(For all the previous situations the passivation oxide is only 50 nm thick, which is why the maximum capacitance value is still lower.) This increase in capacitance is found to