Workplace ostracism and deviant and helping behaviors: The moderating role of 360 degree feedback
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Drawing on sociometer theory, we argue that when 360 degree feedback is used in a work setting, being ostracized by coworkers has a stronger negative influence on employees' state self‐esteem, which promotes interpersonal deviance and demotivates helping directed toward coworkers, as compared to settings in which 360 feedback is not used. We tested our hypotheses using data collected from North American employees (Study 1) and a two‐wave survey of employees in China (Study 2). Results from both studies support the hypothesized interaction between workplace ostracism and 360 degree feedback on interpersonal deviance and helping behavior. Results from Study 2 further show that lower state self‐esteem accounts for the stronger negative association of ostracism with helping behavior among employees who are exposed to 360 degree feedback. Ostracism is not related to subsequent state self‐esteem or behavior when 360 degree feedback is absent. We discuss the implications for theory and research concerning employee exclusion. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it