The PCMT model of organizational support: Scale development and theoretical application.

The PCMT model of organizational support conceptualizes organizational support as consisting of four forms that differ in terms of their perceived target and ascribed motive. Across six studies (n = 1,853), we create and validate a psychometrically reliable scale that captures these four forms of organizational support, as well as offer a theoretical advancement to the organizational support literature. In particular, the first five studies involve content validation; assessment of factor analytic structure; tests of test-retest reliability and measurement invariance; and establishment of discriminant, convergent, and predictive validity. The final study involves deployment of the validated, 24-item scale in the field and illustrates that the four different forms of organizational support differentially predict the discrete dimensions of job burnout, the effects of which spillover and crossover into the home domain. This investigation thus offers both empirical and theoretical contributions. Empirically, we provide applied psychologists with an instrument for measuring the four forms of organizational support, enabling the emergence of new lines of research. Theoretically, we illustrate that the content and characteristics associated with the different forms of organizational support are important considerations as conceptual alignment between the type of organizational support perceived and the well-being outcome under study enhances the support's predictive validity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The PCMT model of organizational support: An integrative review and reconciliation of the organizational support literature.

We present an integrative conceptual review that reconciles the organizational support, social exchange, and social support literatures. In particular, we argue that the prevailing, singular conceptualization of organizational support is misaligned with contemporary perspectives on social exchange-which has served as the bedrock for organizational support theory since organizational support theory's inception-and is inconsistent with the social support literature-which has long recognized that support takes several forms. Thus, we draw on both the social exchange and social support literatures to develop four unique forms of organizational support: Teleological, Personalized, Collectivistic, and Monistic Organizational Support. With this enlarged framework for understanding organizational support in hand, we then detail the various research opportunities that the integration of these literatures affords. Specifically, we explain that this framework warrants future research related to the development of new measures, the differential prediction of outcomes, and the discovery of organizational support profiles. We also invoke the social support literature to highlight the potential opportunities in applying optimal matching theory to organizational support, examining relationships between received and perceived organizational support, and identifying the consequences of excessive organizational support. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Exchanging one uncertainty for another: Justice variability negates the benefits of justice.

Although the importance of organizational justice is without question, our theoretical and empirical knowledge of the justice phenomenon is focused almost exclusively on mean levels of fair treatment, ignoring whether those mean levels are achieved in a consistent or inconsistent manner. This exclusive focus on average levels of justice is not surprising given the implicit assumption in the justice literature that day-to-day variations in justice are glossed over or reinterpreted by individuals. Building upon recent research demonstrating that variability in justice can be as important as average levels of fair treatment, we leverage tenets of uncertainty management theory to provide a conceptual bridge that integrates justice variability into the group engagement model. Our theoretical model proposes justice variability (arising from fluctuations in one's fair treatment over time) negates the very benefits that average levels of interpersonal justice provide. Results of 2, week-long experience sampling studies (one of 111 employees and one of 352 employees nested in 104 groups), used to construct assessments of day-to-day justice variability, largely supported our predictions regarding interactive effects between average levels of justice and justice variability on judgments of pride in the group and, ultimately, cooperative behavior, providing important takeaways for theory, research, and practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Wearable bluetooth sensors for capturing relational variables and temporal variability in relationships: A construct validation study.

The advent of wearable sensor technologies has the potential to transform organizational research by offering the unprecedented opportunity to collect continuous, objective, highly granular data over extended time periods. Recent evidence has demonstrated the potential utility of Bluetooth-enabled sensors, specifically, in identifying emergent networks via colocation signals in highly controlled contexts with known distances and groups. Although there is proof of concept that wearable Bluetooth sensors may be able to contribute to organizational research in highly controlled contexts, to date there has been no explicit psychometric construct validation effort dedicated to these sensors in field settings. Thus, the two studies described here represent the first attempt to formally evaluate longitudinal Bluetooth data streams generated in field settings, testing their ability to (a) show convergent validity with respect to traditional self-reports of relational data; (b) display discriminant validity with respect to qualitative differences in the nature of alternative relationships (i.e., advice vs. friendship); (c) document predictive validity with respect to performance; (d) decompose variance in network-related measures into meaningful within- and between-unit variability over time; and (e) complement retrospective self-reports of time spent with different groups where there is a "ground truth" criterion. Our results provide insights into the validity of Bluetooth signals with respect to capturing variables traditionally studied in organizational science and highlight how the continuous data collection capabilities made possible by wearable sensors can advance research far beyond that of the static perspectives imposed by traditional data collection strategies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).