The positive and negative effects of social status on ratings of voice behavior: A test of opposing structural and psychological pathways
AffiliationEller College of Management, University of Arizona
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherAmerican Psychological Association (APA)
CitationKim, S., McClean, E. J., Doyle, S. P., Podsakoff, N. P., Lin, E., & Woodruff, T. (2021). The Positive and Negative Effects of Social Status on Ratings of Voice Behavior: A Test of Opposing Structural and Psychological Pathways. Journal of Applied Psychology.
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
RightsCopyright © 2021, American Psychological Association.
Collection InformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at email@example.com.
AbstractWe examine how social status—the amount of respect and admiration conferred by others—is related to leader ratings of team member voice. In a field study using 373 West Point cadets nested in 60 squads, we find that there are two countervailing pathways linking social status to leader voice ratings: A positive structural path via instrumental network centrality and a negative psychological path via perceived image risk. In addition, we show that these relationships are contingent upon a relational moderator, such that highquality team interpersonal relationships weakened the positive indirect effect via instrumental network centrality but strengthened the negative indirect effect via image risk. Two post hoc experiments provided preliminary support for our arguments that perceived image risk causes people to deliver their voice in amanner that is more acceptable to recipients and ruled out several alternative explanations. The results of our multilevel analyses shed new light on how, why, and when social status impacts leader ratings of voice. In doing so, we challenge assumptions in the extant voice research and open avenues for future research.
VersionFinal accepted manuscript
SponsorsUniversity of Arizona