JoHo kan jouw hulp goed gebruiken! Check hier de diverse studentenbanen die aansluiten bij je studie, je competenties verbeteren, je cv versterken en een bijdrage leveren aan een tolerantere wereld
Trouble in Paradise - Social Psychology in Organizations
Social psychology in Organizations specialization at Leiden University
Lecture 5: Trouble in Paradise
Workplace victimization
Workplace victimization: The harming of an employee's well-being by an act of aggression perpetrated by one or more members of the organisation (Aquino & Thau, 2009)
Harming: The thwarting of a fundamental psychological need, such as the need to belong, the ability to avoid pain, or the need for control.
Victims
Olweus (1978): Focus on victim personality Submissive and provocative victims
2 types of victims:
Submissive victims contribute passively to their victimisation as they are seen as easy targets of others' aggression
Provocative victims are hostile, uncompromising, and aggressive, and elicit aggression as a form of reprisal or control
Victim precipitation theory
Precipitation: to cause an (undesirable) event to happen
Elias (1986). Focus on the victim's actions and the perpetrator’s interpretation of these actions
Victims participate in the sequence of events that leads up to their victimization
Active precipitation: The victim knowingly provokes the offender by way of provocative clothing, vulgar language, provocative body language, use of threats and swear words, or by minor attacks.
Passive precipitation: The victim possesses behavioural, character, ethnic, or personality traits that motivate or threaten the attacker, or may have a competing interest. The victim is not conscious or aware of the provocation he/she provides to the offender
Symbolic interactionism
Felson (1992): Victims breach a social norm
-Focus on Interaction between victim and perpetrator
Aggressive behaviour is:
1. a means of social control
2. a form of retributive justice
3. a way to enhance social identity
A relational model of victimization
| Subbmissive victim | Provocative victim | |
| Domineering perpetrator | classic bullying | episodic victimization, potentially explosive |
| Reactive perpetrator | low victimization | repeated victimization and aggression |
What can you do to prevent being victimized at work?
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB):
Sportsmanship: willingness to tolerate less than ideal situations by not complaining about minor issues
Courtesy: preventing workrelated problems
Altruism: help others with organisationallyrelevant tasks
How is OCB related to harrassment and bullying?
1. Norm of (positive) reciprocity: you do something good for the group, therefore the group should treat you well in return (=> more OCB, less bullying)
2. Low OCB can be construed as violation of group norms, which can actually enhance victimization (especially among low status group members; => less OCB, more bullying)
Status
High status individuals are less frequently victimized than low status individuals, because high status individuals are seen as more deserving (i.e. they are respected).
To the extent that high status is associated with more power, high status individuals are also victimized less frequently because they are less vulnerable due to their control over important resources
Revenge
Aquino, Tripp, & Bies (2001)
Revenge: An action to some perceived harm or wrongdoing by another party that is intended to inflict damage, injury, discomfort, or punishment on the party judged responsible
-revenge can also be constructive!
Procedural justice ---- - -----> desire for revenge ----- + ------> counterproductive work behavior
Counterproductive work behaviours
1: Directed at the organisation
• Taking an extra or longer break than is acceptable
• Trying to look busy while wasting time
• Putting little effort into work
• Wasting company materials
• Intentionally working slower than you could have worked
• Spending too much time fantasizing or daydreaming instead of working
• Spending time on personal matters while at work
• Taking property from work without permission...
2. Directed at the supervisor
• Purposely neglecting to follow your supervisor’s instructions
• Acting rudely towards your supervisor
• Spreading unconfirmed rumors about your supervisor
• Doing something to get your supervisor into trouble
• Encouraging your coworkers to get back at your supervisor
Status and revenge
High status people are less likely to take revenge than low status people, because high status people:
• are less affected by the threat because their high status position functions as a buffer
• experience normative pressure to 'take the moral high ground
Bullying and stress
Exposure to bullying can lead to:
- Depression
- Stress-related psychological complaints
- Stress
Stress related appraisals
Primary appraisals: evaluation of the significance of an event for one's well-being ("How stressful is it?")
-Social identity is an important determinant of primary appraisals. What is stressful to one identity need not be equally stressful to another identity.
Secondary appraisals: assessment of one's capacity to cope with a stressor ("Can I cope?")
Identification:
Identification influences the degree to which a (work-) environment is considered stressful:
• Identification indicates how important an identity is to you
• Ingroup information about the stressfulness of an event influences our own stress appraisals of that event (=> Haslam, Jetten, O’Brien, & Jacobs, 2005)
Social identity influences primary stress appraisals in two ways:
1. What is stressful to one identity need not be stressful to another identity (identity salience)
2. Ingroup information (more than outgroup information) about the stressfulness of an event influences our own stress appraisals
Social identity also influences secondary appraisals: coping.
When social identity is salient, people are more likely to:
1. Provide support to other ingroup members
2. Receive support from fellow ingroup members
3. Interpret support in the manner it was intended
Support and identity:
A sense of shared identity (a salient identity) helps to buffer group members from threat
Membership in low status groups is stressful, as low group status reflects poorly on one’s self-esteem.
Coping with low group status:
1. Individual mobility – (consider) leaving the group
2. Social creativity – change how you perceive the situation
3. Social competition/social change – change the situation
Social identity
Which strategy is chosen depends on:
1. Level of social identification
-low identifiers are more likely to pursue individual mobility
2. Permeability of group boundaries
-individual mobility is more likely when it is easy to leave the group
3. Security of the status relations (i.e., status stability and status legitimacy: how likely is it that the status relations will change?)
-social competition/change is more likely when low group status is unstable and illegitimate
Access:
Public
Join WorldSupporter!
Work for WorldSupporter
JoHo can really use your help! Check out the various student jobs here that match your studies, improve your competencies, strengthen your CV and contribute to a more tolerant world
Search other summaries?
This content is also used in .....
Lecture notes with Social Psychology in Organizations at Leiden University - 2019/2020
Positive Psychology - Social Psychology in Organizations
Positive Psychology - Social Psychology in Organizations
Social psychology in Organizations specialization at Leiden University
Lecture 1: Positive Psychology
Positive Psychology: the scientific study of the strengths and virtues that enable individuals and communities to thrive
Positive organizational behavior (POB): the study and application of positively oriented human resource strengths and psychological capacities that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance in today’s workspace.
Some studies say happy people are more productive (Oswald, Proto & Sgroi, 2015).
Nun study (Danner, 2001):
-Do happy people live longer than unhappy people?
-Writings of aspiring nuns about their lives, just before taking their final vows.
-Researchers marked texts for how positive they were
-Findings: age 90: unhappy nuns ~ 30%, happy nuns ~ 60% alive.
Happiness
Determinants of happiness (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon and Schkade, 2005):
~50% genetics
~ 40% intentional activities
~10% circumstances
Happiness research – twins:
-Monozygotic twins are very likely to be similarly happy
Circumstances: account for about 10-15% of our happiness levels
- Income/wealth
- Age
- Health
- (Gender)
- Marriage
- Religion
- Education
- Beauty
Intentional acts:
-Express gratitude for what you have/what is going well
-Help other people
-Savor pleasant things in life
-Stay in shape, live healthy
-Cultivate social relationships
-Have goals and ambitions that you value
-Increase flow experience
-(Try to rebound quickly from negative events)
Changes in wellbeing:
-condition1: do acts of kindness (5 a single day): got a lot happier
-condition2: do acts of kindness (1/day): got a bit happier
-control: got unhappier
Intentional activities:
- It's episodic
- It can be varied
- Can directly counteract adaptation to circumstances
How to be happy according to positive psychology:
-Do new activities rather than change circumstances
-Vary
-Fit between activity and values
- Appreciate
-Take part in activities that give you flow
Flow: Experience of complete absorption in the present moment
-when you lose track of time
-clear, proximal goals
-challenges that stretch (a bit) your existing skills
-immediate feedback
People vary widely in their experience of flow, even if skills are equal
How to measure/investigate flow:
-Questionnaire: after the fact, frequency and which activities
-Experience sampling method (ESM)
-Objective measurement/Observation
-Physiological measures (e.g.: cortisol)
-Experimental manipulation
Application of flow interventions:
-in educational contexts
-in therapy
-at work
Flow can be present in unwanted areas: e.g.: binge watching tv
How do you recover from negative events that happened to you?
-Resilience: ability to bounce back
-Low and high end of distress: are unhappy. Moderate amount: happiest
-Those who have experienced adversity deal with it better a second time
-Self-compassion: self-kindness + sense of common humanity + mindfulness
-Self-compassion and academic
.....read moreAccess:
Public
Power and Leadership - Social Psychology in Organizations
Power and Leadership - Social Psychology in Organizations
Social psychology in Organizations specialization at Leiden University
Lecture 2: Power and Leadership
Power
Asymmetric control over valued resources in social relationships
Power approach theory by Keltner:
Power leads to:
-Lack of perspective taking
-Lack of compassion and empathy
-Increased abstarct thinking
-Increased optimism and risk taking
-Increased sense of control
-Increased assertiveness
- Example: fan blowing on the table so papers are moving around. High-power people: turn off fan.
-Helping: people who feel powerful are more likely to help (rather than wait and see what happens)
Is power the same as status?
No, power ≠ status
Power = asymmetric outcome control
Status = respect and admiration and place in hierarchy/group
A combination of high power and low status can lead to aggression
Leadership
Is power the same as leadership?
No, power ≠ leadership
Power = asymmetric outcome control
Leadership = influence, motivation and direction towards common goal
-ability to influence, motivate and direct toward shared goal
How to select/create a leader who uses power to benefit the group?
Perspective taking: Power reduces perspective taking so the leader should be someone who is very good at perspective taking to begin with
Power as opportunity vs. responsibility: people who see power as a responsibility tend to take other people's perspective into account
Fairness
Distributive fairness = fair outcomes
-Equity: everyone gets the same opportunity
-Equality: everyone gets the same thing
-Need: everyone gets what the amount they are in need of
Procedural fairness = fair procedures for allocation of outcomes
-The fairness of the decision-making procedure about the allocation of resources, regardless of outcomes.
-People look at:
–-> Neutrality of decision making
-->Trust in motives of leader
-->Politeness and courtesy of leader to followers
Why is procedural fairness important?
-It communicates a message about one’s status in a group (relational concern)
-It can be a means to get control over outcomes
In research procedural fairness is often operationalized as: voice
Voice: an opportunity for followers to voice their opinion about a decision (outcome)
Typical procedural justice experiment:
Task --(pre-decisional voice)-->Allocation procedure ---(post decisional voice)-->Outcome
People’s evaluations of leaders largely depend on their evaluation of the procedural fairness rather than on their personal outcomes
Pre-decisional voice: leads to higher perceptions of outcome and proceduraal fairness
What is the contingency approach?
The effect of procedural fairness on follower reactions depends on leadership styles and follower characteristics:
C (leadership characteristic)
⟱
A (procedural fairness)-------------------> B (influence of followers)
-C can be something like: self-confident leader, or rewarding leader
Self-determination theory
Increase intrinsic motivation of followers by fulfilling 3 needs:
- Need for autonomy
- Need for competence
- Need for relatedness
Procedural fairness might help leaders to fulfill these needs in their followers
Access:
Public
Working together - Social Psychology in Organizations
Working together - Social Psychology in Organizations
Social psychology in Organizations specialization at Leiden University
Lecture 3: Working together
Why is it important for employees to trust their supervisor?
Subordinates who trust their leaders are:
-more satisfied
-more committed
-wanting to leave the workspace less
-show more altruism at work
The repair of trust
Theories of trust repair:
1. Attributions: you did a bad thing, therefore you are a bad person
2. Social Equilibrium
3. Negotiation of trustworthiness
Attributions
What to do?
Apology
-how effective is it?
4 conditions (van Leeuwen, van den Bosch, Castano, & Hopman, 2010):
- deviant exclusion: seems most effective, but team looks very disloyal
- deviant apology: the team is regarded most positively in this condition
- group apology: team is seen as most loyal
- downplay “don’t take it so seriously”
-does apologizing always work?
Not if it’s insincere, not if it insufficient (e.g.: verbal apology but no repair)
Apology implies admitting guilt (e.g.: “saying oh no, I’m sorry, are you ok?” If it isn’t your fault might mean your insurance still has to pay because you said sorry)
Integrity violation: e.g. journalist copies work of someone else --> internal attribution
Competence violation: e.g.: journalist writes with spelling mistakes and clearly done in a rush --> external attribution
Denying: not only violator but also liar, damage to reputation
Social equilibrium
Social equilibrium:dynamic working balence bwteeen its interdependent parts. If one changes, the other has to adjust to maintain equilibrium.
Situation: person loses client due to sharing information about them.
-To restore trust with company: get client back and accept demotion because overcompensation promotes trust more than exact compensation
Negotiations of trustworthiness
Bilateral Model of Trust Repair: Transgressors want to be trusted and consider themselves trustworthy. The other person does not trust the transgressor right away.
Innocent or guilty
-If guilty: situational (external) or dispositional (internal) attribution?
-If internal: fixable shortcoming or fixed shortcoming?
-Fixed shortcoming: trust is NOT repaired
Is trust always positive?
The more people trust eachother the less they monitor eachother’s behavior
Team autonomy:
Low autonomy
Trust -------------------+--------------------------àteam performance
High autonomy
Trust----------------_---------------------------à team performance
The psychological side of helping:
Instrumental gain: seeking help improves your life
Psychological side: receiving help is associated with incompetence and dependency
Help seekers underestimate the likelihood of being given help because:
-they do not take into account the social and psychological costs of refusing a request
-they overestimate the instrumental costs that help givers incur
Costs and benefits
Associated with being warm and caring, but it can simultaneously show competence
Group status and helping (Tauber & van Leeuwen, 2012):
-Low group status condition:
-High status condition:
-Help seeking condition: answer now or ask for
.....read moreAccess:
Public
Decision making and team conflict - Social Psychology in Organizations
Decision making and team conflict - Social Psychology in Organizations
Social psychology in Organizations specialization at Leiden University
Lecture 4: Decision Making and Team Conflict
Identity threat: being judged as a bad person
Business week ranking:
If you can convince others of your view you feel legitimized and can accomplish things
-Low ranking means identity threat
-Strategic recategorization:
- Affirm neglected positive aspects (zoom in)
- Explaining the negative evaluation
-Strategic (favorable) social comparison (zoom out)
If you can convince others of your view you feel legitimized and can accomplish things
Self-affirmation
Another strategy when facing identity threat
Self-affirmation is often used to decrease an identity threat
2 step procedure (K.Harber, 1995):
- ranking of personal characteristics and values
- take rank order number 1 and see how well you’re doing in it in your life
Self-affirmation can lead to:
-Higher grades, more abstract thinking, easier to maintain motivation
-More self-control
-More open-mindedness
Value conflict
Aimed at investigating interventions to solve value conflict
Interventions based upon
-decrease of identity threat
-Self-affirmation
-Other-affirmation --> people became more open-minded
General conflict resolution technique?
-values: for non-chosen charity -other-affirmation helped
-resources: for personal profit – other-affirmation didn’t help at all
Overconfidence in decision-making
Overestimation:
Of personal abilities, performance, chances of success or level of control
Overplacement:
The idea that you are better than others
Overprecision:
Certainty of precision of private beliefs
Hard-easy effect
In general: underestimation of performance on easy tasks and overestimate performance on hard tasks
Underplacement also occurs on hard tasks (others are better than you)
Illustartion of hard-easy effect:
More biases:
-Illusion of control: overestimate control over situation
-Planning fallacy: underestimate time needed for things
-Comparative optimism/pessimism: e.g.: overestimate likelihood being struck by lightning
-Pessimism about the future
There seems to be no effect of individual differences for the biases about over and underestimation
Moderators of overestimation
-Controllability
-Observability (e.g.: friendliness is easier to observe than honesty)
-Personal experience with absence of negative outcome (e.g.: smoking for years and still no lung problems --> it’s ok)
Difficult decision making: conflict at the workspace
Negative effects of workplace conflict: stress, burn-out, lower commitment, less innovation, higher turnover etc
Lack of conflict--> groupthink – e.g.: bay of Pigs – US invasion of Cuba, people didn’t speak up when planning
For good decision making we do need conflict to prevent groupthink, enhance creative thinking etc. However, it takes up a lot of energy, time, reduces satisfaction
Jehn – 3 types of intragroup conflict
Task conflict: disagreement among group members about the content and outcomes of the task being performed
Relationship conflict: Disagreement about interpersonal issues
Process conflict: disagreement about logistics
.....read more
Access:
Public
Trouble in Paradise - Social Psychology in Organizations
Trouble in Paradise - Social Psychology in Organizations
Social psychology in Organizations specialization at Leiden University
Lecture 5: Trouble in Paradise
Workplace victimization
Workplace victimization: The harming of an employee's well-being by an act of aggression perpetrated by one or more members of the organisation (Aquino & Thau, 2009)
Harming: The thwarting of a fundamental psychological need, such as the need to belong, the ability to avoid pain, or the need for control.
Victims
Olweus (1978): Focus on victim personality Submissive and provocative victims
2 types of victims:
Submissive victims contribute passively to their victimisation as they are seen as easy targets of others' aggression
Provocative victims are hostile, uncompromising, and aggressive, and elicit aggression as a form of reprisal or control
Victim precipitation theory
Precipitation: to cause an (undesirable) event to happen
Elias (1986). Focus on the victim's actions and the perpetrator’s interpretation of these actions
Victims participate in the sequence of events that leads up to their victimization
Active precipitation: The victim knowingly provokes the offender by way of provocative clothing, vulgar language, provocative body language, use of threats and swear words, or by minor attacks.
Passive precipitation: The victim possesses behavioural, character, ethnic, or personality traits that motivate or threaten the attacker, or may have a competing interest. The victim is not conscious or aware of the provocation he/she provides to the offender
Symbolic interactionism
Felson (1992): Victims breach a social norm
-Focus on Interaction between victim and perpetrator
Aggressive behaviour is:
1. a means of social control
2. a form of retributive justice
3. a way to enhance social identity
A relational model of victimization
| Subbmissive victim | Provocative victim | |
| Domineering perpetrator | classic bullying | episodic victimization, potentially explosive |
| Reactive perpetrator | low victimization | repeated victimization and aggression |
What can you do to prevent being victimized at work?
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB):
Sportsmanship: willingness to tolerate less than ideal situations by not complaining about minor issues
Courtesy: preventing workrelated problems
Altruism: help others with organisationallyrelevant tasks
How is OCB related to harrassment and bullying?
1. Norm of (positive) reciprocity: you do something good for the group, therefore the group should treat you well in return (=> more OCB, less bullying)
2. Low OCB can be construed as violation of group norms, which can actually enhance victimization (especially among low status group members; => less OCB, more bullying)
Status
High status individuals are less frequently victimized than low status individuals, because high status individuals are seen as more deserving (i.e. they are respected).
To the extent that high status is associated with more power, high status individuals are also victimized less frequently because they are less vulnerable due to their control over important resources
Revenge
Aquino, Tripp, & Bies (2001)
Revenge: An action to some perceived harm or wrongdoing by another party that is intended
.....read moreAccess:
Public
Check how to use summaries on WorldSupporter.org
Online access to all summaries, study notes en practice exams
- Check out: Register with JoHo WorldSupporter: starting page (EN)
- Check out: Aanmelden bij JoHo WorldSupporter - startpagina (NL)
Using and finding summaries, study notes en practice exams on JoHo WorldSupporter
There are several ways to navigate the large amount of summaries, study notes en practice exams on JoHo WorldSupporter.
- Starting Pages: for some fields of study and some university curricula editors have created (start) magazines where customised selections of summaries are put together to smoothen navigation. When you have found a magazine of your likings, add that page to your favorites so you can easily go to that starting point directly from your profile during future visits. Below you will find some start magazines per field of study
- Use the menu above every page to go to one of the main starting pages
- Tags & Taxonomy: gives you insight in the amount of summaries that are tagged by authors on specific subjects. This type of navigation can help find summaries that you could have missed when just using the search tools. Tags are organised per field of study and per study institution. Note: not all content is tagged thoroughly, so when this approach doesn't give the results you were looking for, please check the search tool as back up
- Follow authors or (study) organizations: by following individual users, authors and your study organizations you are likely to discover more relevant study materials.
- Search tool : 'quick & dirty'- not very elegant but the fastest way to find a specific summary of a book or study assistance with a specific course or subject. The search tool is also available at the bottom of most pages
Do you want to share your summaries with JoHo WorldSupporter and its visitors?
- Check out: Why and how to add a WorldSupporter contributions
- JoHo members: JoHo WorldSupporter members can share content directly and have access to all content: Join JoHo and become a JoHo member
- Non-members: When you are not a member you do not have full access, but if you want to share your own content with others you can fill out the contact form
Quicklinks to fields of study (main tags and taxonomy terms)
Field of study
- Communication & Media sciences
- Corporate & Organizational Sciences
- Cultural Studies & Humanities
- Economy & Economical sciences
- Education & Pedagogic Sciences
- Health & Medical Sciences
- IT & Exact sciences
- Law & Justice
- Nature & Environmental Sciences
- Psychology & Behavioral Sciences
- Public Administration & Social Sciences
- Science & Research
- Technical Sciences
Check related topics:
WorldSupporter and development goals
Add new contribution