Experienced incivility in the workplace: A meta-analytical review of its construct validity and nomological network

Jingxian Yao, Sandy Lim, Cathy Yang Guo (), Amy Ou and Jomel Wei Xuan Ng
Additional contact information
Cathy Yang Guo: LEM - Lille économie management - UMR 9221 - UA - Université d'Artois - UCL - Université catholique de Lille - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Although workplace incivility has received increasing attention in organizational research over the past two decades, there have been recurring questions about its construct validity, especially vis-à-vis other forms of workplace mistreatment. Also, the antecedents of experienced incivility remain understudied, leaving an incomplete understanding of its nomological network. In this meta-analysis using Schmidt and Hunter's [Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (3rd ed.), Sage] random-effect meta-analytic methods, we validate the construct of incivility by testing its reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, as well as its incremental predictive validity over other forms of mistreatment. We also extend its nomological network by drawing on the perpetrator predation framework to systematically study the antecedents of experienced incivility. Based on 105 independent samples and 51,008 participants, we find extensive support for incivility's construct validity. Besides, we demonstrate that demographic characteristics (gender, race, rank, and tenure), personality traits (agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, negative affectivity, and self-esteem), and contextual factors (perceived uncivil climate and socially supportive climate) are important antecedents of experienced incivility, with contextual factors displaying a stronger association with incivility. In a supplementary primary study with 457 participants, we find further support for the construct validity of incivility. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of this study. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Date: 2021-04-29
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Published in Journal of Applied Psychology, 2021, ⟨10.1037/apl0000870⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03267656

DOI: 10.1037/apl0000870

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().