A moderated mediation model of employee experienced diversity management: openness to experience, perceived visible diversity discrimination and job satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study developed and tested a moderated mediation model on workplace diversity management. The analysis examined whether diversity management affects job satisfaction via perceived discrimination, depending on employees' openness to experience. Design/methodology/approach Building upon the assumptions of social identity theory, social cognitive theory and Big-Five theory, this study proposed and tested a model that analyzes the process through which diversity management influences perceived visible diversity discrimination and job satisfaction, depending on employees' openness to experience. Findings This study found support for the proposed moderated mediation model, which suggests that diversity management interacts with employees' openness to experience personality to influence their job satisfaction through perceived visible diversity discrimination. The results indicated that diversity management increased employees' job satisfaction in the workplace and that the relationship between diversity management and job satisfaction was further mediated by employees' perceptions of being discriminated against because of their age, gender and racial identities. The effect of diversity management on job satisfaction through perceived visible diversity discrimination was stronger when employees had high levels of openness to experience. Practical implications The results of the study suggest that the diversity management is an important organizational intervention to improve job satisfaction by providing a scientific explanation of its underlying psychological process and identifying the factors associated with the process, such as personality and perception of being discriminated. Originality/value This study contributes to extend the diversity management literature by applying the assumptions of social identity theory, social cognitive theory and Big-Five theory together to identify the relationship between diversity management and job satisfaction and the effect of perceived discrimination and openness to experience in the relationship.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".