Applying adaptation theory to understand experienced incivility processes: Testing the repeated exposure hypothesis.

Experienced workplace incivility has consistently been linked to a host of negative outcomes, but as a low-intensity behavior, most working adults should be able to adapt and move on from these experiences of incivility over time. On the basis of repeated measures data from a heterogeneous sample of 625 respondents across three waves, with a 1-month lag between assessments, and framed within adaptation theory, we propose and find strong empirical evidence that although incivility is concurrently related to 5 indices related to both positive and negative employee well-being (i.e., role overload, affective commitment, subjective well-being, burnout, and turnover intentions), working adults adapt to these experiences over time. However, in considering the unfolding of incivility over time, we also make a meaningful contribution and extension to adaptation theory, a theory wherein little consideration has been given to stressors that may be recurring over time. We propose and test the repeated exposure hypothesis as a framework for conceptualizing how past (distal) experiences of a stressor can indirectly influence strain outcomes via more proximal experiences of the stressor. We also provide preliminary evidence that indices of well-being have systematic lagged effects on incivility, supporting the argument for reverse causation over time between the constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Understanding role stressors and job satisfaction over time using adaptation theory.

In this study, we seek to highlight a potentially fundamental shift in how dynamic stressor-strain relationships should be conceptualized over time. Specifically, we provide an integrated empirical test of adaptation and role theory within a longitudinal framework. Data were collected at 3 time points, with a 6-week lag between time points, from 534 respondents. Using latent change modeling, results supported within-person adaptation to changes in job satisfaction and role conflict. Specifically, over the 12-week course of the study, changes in role clarity tended to be maintained, whereas changes in job satisfaction and role conflict tended to be fleeting and reverse themselves. Theoretical implications and future directions are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

A concise, content valid, gender invariant measure of workplace incivility.

The authors present a short, valid, gender invariant measure of workplace incivility that should have a high degree of utility in a variety of research designs, especially those concerned with reducing participant burden such as experience sampling and multiwave longitudinal designs. Given ongoing concerns about the psychometric properties of workplace mistreatment constructs, they validated a 4-item measure of experienced incivility based on series of 3 independent field studies (N = 2,636). In addition to retaining items on the basis of employee rated conceptual alignment (i.e., judgmental criteria) with a standard incivility definition (i.e., ambiguous intent to harm), items were also chosen based on external criteria in terms of their ability to explain incremental variance in outcomes of interest (e.g., role overload, interpersonal deviance). Items with large systematic relationships with other mistreatment constructs (i.e., abusive supervision, supervisor undermining) were excluded. In turn, the authors demonstrated that the 4-item measure is gender invariant, a critical issue that has received limited attention in the literature to date. They also experimentally investigated the effect of recall window (2 weeks, 1 month, 1 year) and found a differential pattern of effect sizes for various outcomes of interest. A fourth independent field study was conducted as a practical application of the measure within a longitudinal framework. An autoregressive model examining experienced incivility and counterproductive work behaviors was tested. Data was collected from a sample of 278 respondents at 3 time points with 1 month between assessments. Implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record