The Effects of Workplace Friendship Network Centrality on Deep Acting

Overview

Journal Front Psychol

Date 2023 Jun 26

PMID 37359867

Authors

Na Yoon Kim

Hongseok Oh

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

We integrated social network theory with conservation of resource theory to predict that workplace friendship network centrality provides service employees with critical psychological resources that foster deep acting: positive affect and positive self-perception. In Study 1, we conducted a survey ( = 105) in a Korean banking firm, revealing that these resources mediate the relationship between workplace friendship network centrality and deep acting. Studies 2 and 3, both experimental studies, investigated the hypothesized causal relationships. In Study 2 ( = 151), we found that workplace friendship network centrality increases the intention toward deep acting. Further, Study 3 ( = 140) confirmed the direct effects of friendship network centrality on positive affect and self-perception. By providing insights into the structural antecedents of emotional labor, we inform managers in service organizations of the value of creating avenues for their employees to form and maintain friendships within the organization.

References

Huang J, Chiaburu D, Zhang X, Li N, Grandey A . Rising to the challenge: Deep acting is more beneficial when tasks are appraised as challenging. J Appl Psychol. 2015; 100(5):1398-408. DOI: 10.1037/a0038976. View

Griffith J, Young J, Hankin B . Longitudinal associations between positive affect and relationship quality among children and adolescents: Examining patterns of co-occurring change. Emotion. 2019; 21(1):28-38. PMC: 7073307. DOI: 10.1037/emo0000682. View

Totterdell P, Wall T, Holman D, Diamond H, Epitropaki O . Affect networks: a structural analysis of the relationship between work ties and job-related affect. J Appl Psychol. 2004; 89(5):854-67. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.854. View

Chiaburu D, Harrison D . Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and performance. J Appl Psychol. 2008; 93(5):1082-103. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1082. View

Hobfoll S . Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. Am Psychol. 1989; 44(3):513-24. DOI: 10.1037//0003-066x.44.3.513. View

Judge T, Ilies R . Affect and job satisfaction: a study of their relationship at work and at home. J Appl Psychol. 2004; 89(4):661-73. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.661. View

Fredrickson B . The role of positive emotions in positive psychology. The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Am Psychol. 2001; 56(3):218-26. PMC: 3122271. DOI: 10.1037//0003-066x.56.3.218. View

WATSON D, Tellegen A . Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychol Bull. 1985; 98(2):219-35. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.98.2.219. View

Trougakos J, Beal D, Cheng B, Hideg I, Zweig D . Too drained to help: a resource depletion perspective on daily interpersonal citizenship behaviors. J Appl Psychol. 2014; 100(1):227-36. DOI: 10.1037/a0038082. View

10.

Venkataramani V, Dalal R . Who helps and harms whom? Relational antecedents of interpersonal helping and harming in organizations. J Appl Psychol. 2007; 92(4):952-66. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.952. View

11.

BEM D . Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychol Rev. 1967; 74(3):183-200. DOI: 10.1037/h0024835. View

12.

Lee M, Han S, Hong S, Hyun H . Relationship Bonds and Service Provider's Emotional Labor: Moderating Effects of Collectivism. Front Psychol. 2019; 10:370. PMC: 6399148. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00370. View

13.

Hulsheger U, Schewe A . On the costs and benefits of emotional labor: a meta-analysis of three decades of research. J Occup Health Psychol. 2011; 16(3):361-89. DOI: 10.1037/a0022876. View

14.

Ma P, Zhang L, Dong H, Yu J . The relationships between teachers' emotional labor and display rules, trait emotions, exhaustion, and classroom emotional climate. Front Psychol. 2023; 14:957856. PMC: 10010285. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.957856. View

15.

WATSON D, Clark L, Tellegen A . Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988; 54(6):1063-70. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063. View

16.

Gerbasi A, Porath C, Parker A, Spreitzer G, Cross R . Destructive de-energizing relationships: How thriving buffers their effect on performance. J Appl Psychol. 2015; 100(5):1423-33. DOI: 10.1037/apl0000015. View

17.

Podsakoff P, Mackenzie S, Lee J, Podsakoff N . Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003; 88(5):879-903. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. View

18.

Burt R, Kilduff M, Tasselli S . Social network analysis: foundations and frontiers on advantage. Annu Rev Psychol. 2013; 64:527-47. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143828. View

19.

Shrauger J . Responses to evaluation as a function of initial self-perceptions. Psychol Bull. 1975; 82(4):581-96. DOI: 10.1037/h0076791. View

20.

MacKinnon D, Lockwood C, Hoffman J, West S, Sheets V . A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychol Methods. 2002; 7(1):83-104. PMC: 2819363. DOI: 10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.83. View