Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:26:46.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Coworkers’ Relationship Quality and Interpersonal Emotions in Team-Member Dyads in China: the Moderating Role of Cooperative Team Goals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

Catherine K. Lam ,
Xu Huang ,
Frank Walter  and
Simon C. H. Chan
Catherine K. Lam*
Affiliation:
City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Xu Huang
Affiliation:
Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong
Frank Walter
Affiliation:
Justus Liebig University Giessen, Germany
Simon C. H. Chan
Affiliation:
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong
*
Corresponding author: Catherine K. Lam (mg.cat@cityu.edu.hk)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the origins of discrete interpersonal emotions in team-member dyads using two independent samples from an education institute and a telecommunication services company in China. Results across both studies showed that the quality of team members’ dyadic relationships positively relates to interpersonal admiration, sympathy, and envy, and negatively relates to interpersonal contempt. Furthermore, teams’ cooperative goals moderate these dyad-level linkages. The association of relationship quality with interpersonal emotions is particularly pronounced in teams with less cooperative goals but buffered in teams with more cooperative goals. Finally, on the individual level of analysis, envy and contempt are inversely associated with team members’ work performance, objectively measured. These findings provide new insights about key antecedents and crucial moderators in the development of interpersonal emotions in Chinese work teams and reiterate the relevance of these emotions for tangible performance outcomes.

摘要:

摘要:

这项研究用在中国的教育机构和电信服务公司两个独立样本调查团队-成员对偶中离散人际情感的起源。横跨这两项研究的结果表明, 团队成员的对偶关系质量与人际敬佩、同情和妒忌正相关, 而与人际蔑视负相关。此外, 团队的合作目标调节这些对偶层面的连接。关系质量与人际情感之间的关联在有较少合作目标的团队特别明显, 但在有较多合作目标的团队则有所缓冲。最后, 在个体层面的分析上, 嫉妒和鄙视与团队成员客观测量的工作绩效负关联。这些发现提供了有关中国工作团队里的人际情感发展的关键前因及调节的新见解, 并重申这些情感对有形绩效结果的相关性。

यह शोध चीन के एक शैक्षणिक संस्थान तथा एक दूरसंचार कंपनी के पृथक प्रतिदर्शों के माध्यम से दलीय युग्मों में अंतर्वैयक्तिक मनोभावों का अनुसंधान करता है. दोनों ही प्रतिदर्शों के अध्ययनों में दलीय सदस्यों के युग्म संबंधों का अंतर्वैयक्तिक आदर, सहानुभूति व द्वेष पर सकारात्मक प्रभाव तथा अन्तर्सम्बन्धी अवमानना पर नकारात्मक प्रभाव परिलक्षित होता है. साथ ही सहकारी टीम लक्ष्य दलीय संबंधों में नियंत्रक का कार्य करते हैं. सम्बन्ध विशिष्टता का संसर्ग अन्तर्सम्बन्धी संवेगों से सीमित सहकारी लक्ष्य वाले दलों के सन्दर्भ में अधिक परिलक्षित होता है. लेकिन अधिक सहकारी लक्ष्यों वाले दलों में यह सीमित होता है. वैयक्तिक स्टार पर द्वेष व अवमानना का दलीय सदस्यों के वस्तुगत परिणामों से प्रतिकूल सम्बन्ध है. हमारे शोध से चीनी कार्यदलों के अन्तर्सम्बन्धी संवेदन के उद्गम में महत्वपूर्ण पूर्वगामी तत्वों तथा नियंत्रकों पर नूतन परिज्ञान होता है. यह शोध संवेगों के वस्तुगत कार्यप्रदर्शन में उपयुक्तता को परिलक्षित करता है.

Sumário:

Sumário:

Este estudo investiga as origens das emoções interpessoais discretas em díades de membros de equipe usando duas amostras independentes de um instituto de educação e uma empresa de serviços de telecomunicações na China. Os resultados de ambos os estudos mostraram que a qualidade dos relacionamentos diádicos dos membros de equipe se relaciona positivamente com admiração interpessoal, simpatia e inveja e negativamente se relaciona com desprezo interpessoal. Além disso, as metas compartilhadas de equipes moderam esses vínculos de nível de díade. A associação de qualidade do relacionamento com emoções interpessoais é particularmente acentuada em equipes com objetivos menos compartilhados, mas amortecida em equipes com objetivos mais compartilhados. Finalmente, no nível individual de análise, inveja e desprezo estão inversamente associados ao desempenho do trabalho dos membros da equipe, medidos objetivamente. Essas descobertas fornecem novos discernimentos sobre antecedentes chave e moderadores cruciais no desenvolvimento de emoções interpessoais em equipes de trabalho chinesas e reiteram a relevância dessas emoções para resultados de desempenho tangíveis.

Аннотация:

АННОТАЦИЯ:

Данная работа изучает происхождение отдельных межличностных эмоций во взаимоотношениях сотрудников на основании двух независимых выборок в образовательном учреждении и телекоммуникационной компании в Китае. Результаты обоих исследований показали, что качество взаимоотношений сотрудников положительно соотносится со взаимным чувством восхищения, симпатии и зависти, и отрицательно соотносится с чувством презрения. Кроме того, совместные командные цели регулируют эти взаимные связи. Зависимость качества отношений от межличностных эмоций особенно ярко проявляется в группах с меньшим количеством совместных целей, а наименее заметна в коллективах с большим количеством общих целей. Наконец, на индивидуальном уровне анализа, чувства зависти и презрения обратно пропорциональны производительности труда членов коллектива по объективным показателям. Эти результаты дают новое представление о ключевых предпосылках и важных факторах, регулирующих развитие межличностных эмоций в китайских коллективах, и подтверждают значение этих эмоций для ощутимых результатов работы.

Resumen:

RESUMEN:

Este estudio investiga los orígenes de las emociones interpersonales discretas en las diadas de los miembros de los equipos usando dos muestras independientes de un instituto educativo y una empresa de servicios de telecomunicaciones en China. Los resultados de ambos estudios muestran que la calidad de las relaciones diádicas de los miembros de los equipos se relaciona positivamente con la admiración interpersonal, la simpatía, y la envidia, y negativamente se relaciona con desprecio interpersonal. Además, las metas colaborativas de los equipos moderan estos vínculos a nivel de diadas. La relación de la calidad de asociación con las emociones interpersonales particularmente pronunciada en equipos con menos metas colaborativas pero amortiguado en equipos con más metas cooperativas. Finalmente, al nivel individual de análisis, la envidia y el desprecio son inversamente asociados con el rendimiento del trabajo de los miembros del equipo, medido objetivamente. Estos hallazgos dan nuevas visiones sobre los antecedentes clave y los moderadores fundamentales en el desarrollo de emociones interpersonales en equipos de trabajo chinos y recalca la relevancia de estas emociones para resultados tangibles de rendimiento.

Keywords

cooperative team goalsemotions in organizationsrelationship qualitywork teams
Type
Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , December 2016 , pp. 687 - 716
Copyright
Copyright © The International Association for Chinese Management Research 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (Eds.). 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Alexander, M. G., Brewer, M., & Hermann, R. 1999. Images and affect: A functional analysis of out-group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 (1): 78–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, S. E., & Williams, L. J. 1996. Interpersonal, job, and individual factors related to helping processes at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81 (3): 282–296.Google Scholar
Ashkanasy, N. M. 2003. Emotions in organizations: A multilevel perspective. In Dansereau, F. & Yammario, F. J. (Eds.), Research in multi-level issues: Multi-level issues in organizational behavior and strategy, 2: 9–54. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. 1995. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117 (3): 497–529.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. 2001. Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5 (4): 323–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, S. T. 2007. Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (3): 595–615.Google Scholar
Bickel, R. 2007. Multilevel analysis for applied research. London: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bliese, P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In Klein, K. J. & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions: 349–381. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. 1997. Organizational citizenship behavior and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10 (2): 67–69.Google Scholar
Brewer, M. B., & Chen, Y. 2007. Where (who) are collectives in collectivism: Toward a conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism. Psychological Review, 114 (1): 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., & Gardner, W. L. 1999. Emotion. In Spence, J. T. (Ed.). Annual review of psychology: 191–214. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.Google Scholar
Chan, D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 (2): 234–246.Google Scholar
Chen, G., Bliese, P. D., & Mathieu, J. E. 2005. Conceptual framework and statistical procedures for delineating and testing multilevel theories of homology. Organizational Research Methods, 8 (4): 375–409.Google Scholar
Chen, C. C., Chen, X. P., Huang, S. 2013. Chinese guanxi: An integrative review and new direction for future research. Management and Organization Review, 9 (1): 167–207.Google Scholar
Cole, M. S., Walter, F., & Bruch, H. 2008. Affective mechanisms linking dysfunctional behavior to performance in work teams: A moderated mediation study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (5): 945–958.Google Scholar
Côté, S. 2005. A social interaction model of the effects of emotion regulation on work strain. Academy of Management Review, 30 (3): 509–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottrell, C. A., & Neuberg, S. L. 2005. Different emotional reactions to different groups: A sociofunctional threat-based approach to ‘prejudice’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5): 770–789.Google Scholar
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. 2005. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31 (6): 874–900.Google Scholar
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. 2007. The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92 (4): 631–648.Google Scholar
de Dreu, C. K. W., Baas, M., & Nijstad, B. A. 2008. Hedonic tone and activation level in the mood-creativity link: Toward a dual pathway to creativity model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 (5): 739–756.Google Scholar
De Jong, S. B., Van der Vegt, G. S., & Molleman, E. 2007. The relationships among asymmetry in task dependence, perceived helping behavior, and trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (6): 1625–1637.Google Scholar
de la Mora, G. R. 1987. Egalitarian envy: The political foundations of social justice. New York: Paragon House Publishers.Google Scholar
DeShon, R. P., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Schmidt, A. M., Milner, K. R., & Wiechmann, D. 2004. A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (6): 1035–1056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deutsch, M. 1949. A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Relations, 2: 129–152.Google Scholar
Douglas, S. C., & Martinko, M. J. 2001. Exploring the role of individual differences in the prediction of workplace aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 (4): 547–559.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Miller, P. A., Fultz, J., Shell, R., Mathy, R. M., et al. 1989. Relation of sympathy and personal distress to pro-social behavior: A multimethod study. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 57 (1): 55–66.Google Scholar
Elfenbein, H. A. 2007. Emotion in organization: A review and theoretical integration. Academy of Management Annals, 1: 315–386.Google Scholar
Feather, N. T. 1999. Values, achievement, and justice: Studies in the psychology of deservingness. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
Feather, N. T., & Sherman, R. 2002. Envy, resentment, schadenfreude, and sympathy: Reactions to deserved and undeserved achievement and subsequent failure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28 (7): 953–961.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. 1954. A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7 (2): 117–140.Google Scholar
Fischer, A. H., & Roseman, I. J. 2007. Beat them or ban them: The characteristics and social functions of anger and contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93 (1): 103–115.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. 2002. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82 (6): 878–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredrickson, B. L. 2001. The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56 (3): 218–226.Google Scholar
Frijda, N. H. 1993. The place of appraisal in emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 7 (3-4): 357–387.Google Scholar
Frijda, N. H. 1986. The emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbons, F. X., & Buunk, B. P. 1999. Individual differences in social comparison: Development of a scale of social comparison orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76 (1): 129–142.Google Scholar
Goldstein, H., Rasbash, J., Plewis, I., Draper, D., Browne, W., Yang, M., et al. 1998. A user's guide to MlwiN [Computer software and manual]. London: University of London.Google Scholar
Gooty, J., Gavin, M., & Ashkanasy, N. M. 2009. Emotion research in OB: The challenges that lie ahead. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30: 833–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, J. M. 2011. Dual tuning: A minimum condition for understanding affect in organizations? Organizational Psychology Review, 1 (2): 147–164.Google Scholar
Gouldner, A. W. 1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25 (2): 161–178.Google Scholar
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. 1995. Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6 (2): 219–247.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J., Ashton-James, C. E., & Ashkanasy, N. M. 2007. Social comparison processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102 (1): 22–41.Google Scholar
Hofmann, D. A. 2008. Issues in multilevel research: Theory development, measurement, and analysis. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology: 246–260. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A. 1991. Social attraction, personal attraction and self-categorization: A field study. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17 (2): 176–181.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A., & Hardie, E. A. 1992. Prototypicality, conformity and depersonalized attraction: A self-categorization analysis of group cohesiveness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31 (1): 41–56.Google Scholar
Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 530–557.Google Scholar
Johns, G. 2006. The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31 (2): 386–408.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. 1989. Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Books.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Scott, B. A., & Ilies, R. 2006. Hostility, job attitudes, and workplace deviance: Test of a multilevel model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 (1): 126–138.Google Scholar
Kang, S., Shaver, P. R., Sue, S., Min, K., Jing, H. 2003. Culture-specific patterns in the prediction of life satisfaction: Roles of emotion, relationship quality and self-esteem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29 (12): 1596–1608.Google Scholar
Kaplan, S., Bradley, J. C., Luchman, J. N., & Haynes, D. 2009. On the role of positive and negative affectivity in job performance: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94 (1): 162–176.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A. 1994. Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. 2006. Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science Supplement: 7 (3): 77–124.Google Scholar
Laham, S. M. 2009. Expanding the moral circle: Inclusion and exclusion mindsets and the circle of moral regard. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45 (1): 250–253.Google Scholar
Lam, C. K., & Huang, X. 2012. Managing social comparison processes among Chinese employees. In Huang, X. & Bond, M. H. (Eds.), Handbook of Chinese organizational behavior: 118–139. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Lam, C. K., Van der Vegt, G., Walter, F., Huang, X. 2011. Harming high performers: A social comparison perspective on interpersonal harming in work teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 (3): 588–601.Google Scholar
Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. 1999. Bringing emotions into social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 217–244.Google Scholar
Lawler, E. J. 2001. An affect theory of social exchange. The American Journal of Sociology, 107 (2): 321–352.Google Scholar
Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. 2006. Social exchange theory of emotions. In Stets, J. E. & Turner, J. H. (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of emotions: 295–320. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. 1998. Network structure and emotion in exchange relations. American Sociological Review, 63: 871–894.Google Scholar
Lazarus, R. S. 1991. Cognition and motivation in emotion. American Psychologist, 46, 352–367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. 1997. Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73 (1): 91–103.Google Scholar
Lourdes, R., & Extremera, N. 2014. Positive psychological characteristics and interpersonal forgiveness: Identifying the unique contribution of emotional intelligence abilities, big five traits, gratitude and optimism. Personality and Individual differences, 68: 199–204.Google Scholar
Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. 1996. A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81 (2): 123–133.Google Scholar
Leung, K. 2012. Theorizing about Chinese organizational behavior: The role of cultural and social forces. In Huang, X., & Bond, M. H. (Eds.), Handbook of Chinese organizational behavior: 13–28. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. 1990. Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 41 (1): 585–634.Google Scholar
Li, Y., Ahlstrom, D., & Ashkanasy, N. M. 2010. A multilevel model of affect and organizational commitment. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27 (2): 193–213.Google Scholar
Manstead, A. S. R., & Fischer, A. 2001. Social appraisal: The social world as object of and influence on appraisal processes. In Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., & Johnstone, T. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research: 173–186. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W. 1987. The big frog little pond effect on academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79 (3): 280–295.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Gaschke, Y. N., Braverman, D. L., & Evans, T. W. 1992. Mood-congruent judgment is a general effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63 (1): 119–132.Google Scholar
Melwani, S., & Barsade, S. G. 2011. Held in contempt: The psychology, interpersonal, and performance consequences of contempt in a work context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101 (3): 503–520.Google Scholar
Menon, T., & Thompson, L. 2010. Envy at work. Harvard Business Review, 88 (4): 74–79.Google Scholar
Mussweiler, T., & Ruter, K. (2003). What friends are for! The use of routine standards in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 (3): 467–481.Google Scholar
Parrott, W. G., & Smith, R. H. 1993. Distinguishing the experiences of envy and jealousy. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 64 (6): 906–920.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. 2012. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63: 539–569.Google Scholar
Pritchard, R. 1969. Equity theory: A review and critique. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4 (2): 176–211.Google Scholar
Pugh, D. S. 2002. Emotional regulation in individuals and dyads: Causes, costs, and consequences. In Lord, R. G., Klimoski, R. J., & Kanfer, R. (Eds.), Emotions in the workplace: 147–182. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Richter, A. W., West, M. A., van Dick, R., & Dawson, J. F. 2006. Boundary spanners’ identification, intergroup contact, and effective intergroup relations. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (6): 1252–1269.Google Scholar
Roseman, I. J. 2001. A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications. In Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., & Johnstone, T. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research: 68–91. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Salovey, P., & Rodin, J. 1984. Some antecedents and consequences of social-comparison jealousy. Journal of personality and social psychology, 47 (4): 780–792.Google Scholar
Settoon, R. P., & Mossholder, K. W. 2002. Relationship quality and relationship context as antecedents of person- and task-focused interpersonal citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (2): 255–267.Google Scholar
Schaubroeck, J., & Lam, S. S. K. 2004. Comparing lots before and after: Promotion rejectees' invidious reactions to promotees. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 94 (1): 33–47.Google Scholar
Seers, A., Petty, M. M., & Cashman, J. F. 1995. Team-member exchange under team and traditional management. Group and Organizational Management, 20 (1): 18–38.Google Scholar
Sherony, K. M., & Green, S. G. 2002. Co-worker exchange: Relationships between co-workers, leader-member exchange, and work attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (3): 542–548.Google Scholar
Shore, L. M., Coyle-Shapiro, J. A-M., Chen, S. P., Tetrick, L. E. 2009. Social exchange in work settings: Content, process, and mixed models. Management and Organization Review, 5 (3): 289–302.Google Scholar
Smith, R. H., & Kim, S. H. 2007. Comprehending envy. Psychological Bulletin, 133 (1): 46–64.Google Scholar
Snijders, T. A. B., & Kenny, D. A. 1999. The social relations model for family data: A multilevel approach. Personal Relationships, 64 (4): 471–486.Google Scholar
Spector, P. E. 1998. A control theory of the job stress process. In Cooper, C. L. (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress: 153–169. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suh, E., Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Triandis, H. C. 1998. The shifting basis of life satisfaction judgments across cultures: Emotions versus norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (2): 482–493.Google Scholar
Staw, B. M., & Barsade, S. G. 1993. Affect and managerial performance: A test of the sadder-but-wiser vs. happier-and-smarter hypothesis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 304–331.Google Scholar
Sweetman, J., Spears, R., Livingstone, A., G., & Manstead, A. S. R. 2013. Admiration regulates social hierarchy: Antecedents, dispositions, and effects on intergroup behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49 (3): 534–542.Google Scholar
Tai, K., Narayanan, J., & McAllister, D. J. 2012. Envy as pain: Rethinking the nature of envy and its implications for employees and organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 37 (1): 107–129.Google Scholar
Tesser, A., Millar, M., & Moore, J. 1988. Some affective consequences of social comparison and reflection processes: The pain and pleasure of being close. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 (1): 49–61.Google Scholar
Tjosvold, D. 1988. Cooperative and competitive dynamics within and between organizational units. Human Relations, 41 (6): 425–436.Google Scholar
Tjosvold, D., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Sun, H. 2003. Can interpersonal competition be constructive within organizations? Journal of Psychology, 137 (1): 63–84.Google Scholar
Tjosvold, D., Yu, Z., & Hui, C. 2004. Team learning from mistakes: The contribution of cooperative goals and problem-solving. Journal of Management Studies, 41 (7): 1223–1245.Google Scholar
Tse, H., Lam, C., Lawrence, S., & Huang, X. 2013. When my supervisor dislikes you more than me: The effect of dissimilarity in leader-member exchange on coworkers’ interpersonal emotion and perceived help. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98 (6): 974–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vecchio, R. 2005. Explorations in employee envy: Feeling envious and feeling envied. Cognition & Emotion, 19 (1): 69–81.Google Scholar
Venkataramani, V., & Dalal, R. S. 2007. Who helps and harms whom? Relational antecedents of interpersonal helping and harming in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (4): 952–966.Google Scholar
Warner, R. M., Kenny, D. A., & Stoto, M. 1979. A new round robin analysis of variance for social interaction data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37 (10): 1742–1757.Google Scholar
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. 1988. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 (6): 1063–1070.Google Scholar
Weiner, B. 1986. An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. 1996. Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes, and consequences of affective experiences at work. In Staw, B. M. & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 18: 1–74. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., & Cropanzano, R. 1999. Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84 (5): 786–794.Google Scholar
Wong, A., Tjosvold, D. N., & Yu, Z. Y. 2005. Organizational partnership in China. Self-interest, goal interdependence, and opportunism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90 (4): 782–791.Google Scholar
Xin, K. R., & Pearce, J. L. 1996. Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal, 39 (6): 1641–1658.Google Scholar