Cyber and Face‐to‐Face Incivility and Employee Well‐being: A Daily Investigation

(ERC 2010‐2011 Pilot Research Project) 

YoungAh  Park Shuang‐Yueh  PuiSteve M. Jex

What is workplace Incivility?

A form of “low-intensity deviant behavior with ambiguous intent to harm the target in

violation of workplace norms for mutual respect .” (Andersson & Pearson, 1999)

Image source: workplacepsychology.files.wordpress.com/2010/... activerain.com/.../4/5/3/1/ar127474150813545.jpg

Why study workplace Incivility?

One of the most prevalent forms of mistreatment at work (Cortina et al., 2001)

Multiple sources (e.g., superiors, subordinates, coworkers, customers/clients, etc.)

Consistent research findings on the negative effects of experiencing incivility on well-being (psychological physical), job attitudes, job performance and productivity(e.g., Cortina et al., 2001; Lim & Lee, 2011; Lim et al., 2008; Pearson et al., 2001; Porath & Erez, 2008;

Sliter et al., 2010)

Q1: Is workplace incivility a meaningful everyday stressor affecting employees’ daily well-being at work?

What is Cyber Incivility?

Uncivil behaviors manifested through email interactions (Lim & Teo, 2009)

Sending emails using rude/discourteous tones Saying something hurtful in an email that one would not say in person Using CAPS to shout at someone via emails Using emails for time-sensitive issues Ignoring an email request

Image source: testkitchen.colorado.edu/.../06/rudecomputer.jpg img.ehowcdn.com/article‐page‐main/ehow/images...

According to national surveys & NORA…. (2008; 2007; 2002; 1996)

Over 60% working adults use emails at work

Inappropriate and disrespectful content and/or email behaviors cause stress

Respondents reported…They have received email sent in angerTheir boss have used email to avoid difficult face-to-face conversations

NORA calls for research onPotential harms of emerging technologies to employeesThree-fifths of the technologies are info/communication tech.

Cyber IncivilityResearch findings (Lim & Teo, 2009; Lim et al., 2009)

Low levels of job satisfaction & organizational commitment Counter productive work behaviors (behavioral response to stress)

Q2: Is cyber incivility distressing to employees above and beyond face-to-face incivility?

Characteristics of email communication (Byron, 2008; Freidman & Currall, 2003)

Less control over incoming messages Politeness norms are less salient in email communication No containing social cues for message senders to self-correct Delayed responses and feedback from senders Reviewable excess attention

Hypotheses

Based on Affective Event Theory framework (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996)

H1: Day-specific face-to-face incivility is positively related to day-specific distress on the job (affective, physical distress).

H2: Day-specific cyber incivility is positively related to day-specific distress on the job above and beyond face-to-face incivility.

Method 143 full-time employees using email at work completed

initial one-time survey via online (measuring demographics, negative affective disposition)

125 out of 143 participants completed 2 daily online surveys for 5 workdays (87% response rate)

$50 online gift certificate provided

Final sample: 117 people yielding 566 matched daily responses for analysis

56% Female, 86% White, 43.9 years old (SD = 11.8) , 44.67 work hours per week (SD = 7.7)

Method (Diary design)

VariablesFrequency 

of Assessment

Time of Assessment

Control

Negative affective disposition Once 2 weeks before daily surveys

Baseline 5 daysUpon arrival at work in the 

Morning(between  7am‐10am)

Workload  & email load 5 days Afternoon before leaving work 

(between 4pm‐7pm)

IV Face‐to‐Face & Cyber Incivility 5 days

Afternoon before leaving work (between 4pm‐7pm)

DV Distress outomes 5 daysAfternoon before leaving work 

(between 4pm‐7pm)

Method 9 items of face-to-face incivility (Cortina et al., 2001) : “Today, someone at

work put me down.” 14 items of cyber incivility (Lim & Teo, 2009) : “Today, someone at work

sent me an email using a rude and discourteous tone” 14 affective distress items: “annoyed” “frustrated” “depressed” (Mackay

et al., 1978)

14 physical symptoms (e.g., “headache” “upset stomach” “fatigue”(Spector & Jex, 1998)

Multilevel analysis with a hierarchical linear modeling1. Null model: Intercept only model2. Model 1: Control variables (Negative affectivity, daily

workload, email load, morning baseline)3. Model 2: Face-to-face incivility4. Model 3: Cyber incivility

Results

H 1 was supported with face-to-face incivility predicting

affective distress (γ = .82, p < .001) and physical distress (γ =

.16, p < .05) above and beyond control variables.

H 2 was supported with cyber incivility predicting affective

distress (γ = .36, p < .01) and physical distress (γ = .19, p <

.01) above and beyond face-to-face incivility and control

variables.

Discussion Workplace incivility is a meaningful day-to-day stressor

affecting employees’ daily well-being

Cyber incivility inflicted additional distress on employees over and above face-to-face incivility

Given the prevalent use of email for work and business communication, researchers and organizations should pay more attention to this electronic form of incivility

Possible interventions : code of conduct policies, email communication policies, trainings on incivility

Future Directions Given the blurring boundaries between work and family due

to info./communication technologies (e.g., smart phones), negative effects of cyber incivility can spillover to the family domain or crossover to other family members

Why people are uncivil?- workplace norms on civility/interpersonal respect - job characteristics conducive to incivility occurrences

Coping patterns to incivility (Cortina et al., 2009)

Efficacy of incivility trainings

Thank you!

Any questions?

“This research study was supported by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Pilot Research Project Training Program of the University of Cincinnati Education and Research

Center Grant #T42/OH008432-05.”

ReferenceAndersson, L., & Pearson, C. (1999). Tit for Tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24, 452-471.Byron, K. (2008). Carrying too heavy a load? The communication and miscommunication of emotion by email. Academy of Management Review, 33, 309-327. Cortina, L. M. & Magley, V. J. (2009). Patterns and profiles of response to incivility in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,14, 272-288.Cortina, L.M., Magley, V.J., Williams, J.H., & Langhout, R.D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 64-80. Friedman, R. A., & Currall, S. C. (2003). Conflict escalation: Dispute exacerbating elements of e-mail communication. Human Relations, 56, 1325-1347.Lim, S., Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2008). Personal and workgroup incivility: Impact on work and health outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 95-107. Lim, S., & Lee, A. (2011). Work and nonwork outcomes of workplace incivility: Does family support help? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16, 95-111.Lim, S., Lim, V.K.G., Cortina, L., & Magley, V. J. (2009). Reactions to interpersonal and cyber incivility: The role of perceived injustice. In V. J. Magley, A. McGonagle, & J. A., Gallus (Chairs), Rude awakenings: New research on experiences of workplace incivility. Symposium presented at the 24th annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA.Lim, V.K.G., & Teo, T.S.H. (2009). Mind your e-manners: Impact of cyber incivility on employees’ work attitude and behavior. Information & Management, 46, 419–425.Mackay C, Cox T, Burrows G, Lazzerini T. (1978). An inventory for the measurement of self-reported stress and arousal. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 17, 283–284.

ReferenceMadden, M. & Jones, S. (2008) Networked workers: Most workers use the internet or email at their jobs, but they say these technologies are a mixed blessing for them. 9/24/2008. Report: Pew Internet and American Life Project available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2008/Networked-Workers.aspx (accessed 25 August 2011).Porath, C. L., & Erez, A. (2007). Does rudeness really matter? The effects of rudeness on task performance and helpfulness. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1181-1197.Prweb. (2007, September 20). New national survey: U.S. workers face layoffs and humiliation by email [Online news center]. Retrieved from http://www.prweb.com/releases/Workplace/Communications/prweb555039.htmSliter, M. T., Jex, S. M., Wolford, K. A., & McInnerney, J. (2010). How rude! Emotional labor as a mediator between customer incivility and employee outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15, 468-481.Sliter, M. T., Sliter, K. A., & Jex, S. M. (in press). The employee as a punching bag: The effect of multiple sources of incivility on withdrawal and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior.Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal Conflict at Work Scale, Organizational Constraints Scale, Quantitative Workload Inventory, and Physical Symptoms Inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356-367.U.S. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (1996). National Occupational Research Agenda (NIOSH Publication No. 96-115). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/96-115/worken.html#techsWeiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews, vol. 18. (pp. 1-74). US: Elsevier Science/JAI Press.