A Social Context Model of Envy and Social Undermining

By M. Duffy, Kristin L. Scott, Jason D. Shaw, Bennett J. Tepper, Karl Aquino. 2012

512 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We integrate moral disengagement, social identification, and social norms theories to develop, test, and replicate a model that explains how and when envy is associated with social undermining. In Study 1, a two-wave study of hospital employees, results support the prediction that the mediated effect of envy on social undermining behavior through moral disengagement is stronger when employees have low social identification with coworkers. Study 2, a four-wave, multilevel study of student teams, shows that the indirect effect of envy on social undermining through moral disengagement is stronger in teams with low team identification and high team undermining norms. Employees have numerous opportunities to observe and contemplate how the benefits and advantages they enjoy at work compare with those of their colleagues. Whether these opportunities present themselves formally (e.g., through performance appraisals) or informally (e.g., through friendship networks), common experience and empirical research suggest that favorable social comparison information gives people pleasure, but unfavorable information can focus their attention on what they lack relative to their colleagues (Hogg, 2000). In the latter case, feelings of envy—the emotion that surfaces when one lacks and desires others’ superior qualities, achievements, or possessions (Parrott & Smith, 1993)—may arise. Envy of others at work (referred to here as “envy”) may have positive consequences if, for example, it motivates a person to increase performance or attempt self-improvement (Duffy, Shaw, & Schaubroeck, 2008; Schaubroeck & Lam, 2004). But envy also has a dark side. Envy poses threatens the core of an individual’s professional identity

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Information Systems and Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5ee52cdc5a48f5a09c4ca7e98a354fa76aafedad

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

  1. Celia Moore
  2. Mindy K. Shoss
  3. J. Crusius
  4. Jens Lange
  5. John D'Arcy
  6. Tejaswini C. Herath
  7. Manuel F. Gonzalez
  8. Yochi Cohen-Charash

In Information Systems and Management

  1. Celia Moore
  2. Francesca Gino
  3. John D'Arcy
  4. Mindy K. Shoss
  5. Tejaswini C. Herath
  6. S. Grover
  7. Linn van Dyne
  8. Fadel K. Matta

In Social Psychology

  1. Celia Moore
  2. J. Crusius
  3. Jens Lange
  4. Manuel F. Gonzalez
  5. Yochi Cohen-Charash
  6. John D'Arcy
  7. Tejaswini C. Herath
  8. Francesca Gino

Citations in the corpus