TY - JOUR
T1 - Being ostracized versus out of the loop
T2 - Redundant or unique predictors of variance in workplace outcomes?
AU - Jones, Eric E.
AU - Ramsey, Alex T.
AU - Wesselmann, Eric D.
AU - Rosenthal, Heather Jaffe
AU - Hesson-McInnis, Matthew S.
N1 - Funding Information:
Alex T. Ramsey received a grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health (Award Number K12DA041449)
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC
PY - 2021/1
Y1 - 2021/1
N2 - Based on the existing research, being excluded from information (i.e., being out of the loop) produces similar consequences as being ignored or excluded from activities. Consequently, one might wonder whether it is necessary to measure or study different types of exclusion in the workplace context, rather than just assessing a single type of exclusion. The current research investigated the associations between two types of workplace exclusion (i.e., being ostracized and being left out of the loop) and various workplace outcomes, with the purpose of determining whether these different types of exclusion predict unique or redundant variance in these workplace outcomes. In Study 1, we obtained a better model fit when we assigned items measuring out-of-the-loop experiences at work to a different factor than items assessing experiences with ostracism at work. In Study 2, we observed that measuring employees' experiences with being out of the loop predicted unique variance in workplace outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction), above and beyond experiences with ostracism at work. Relative weight analyses suggested that both ostracism and out-of-the-loop experiences were equally important predictors of these outcomes. Together, these studies indicate that being ostracized and being left out of the loop may be distinct exclusion experiences and better predictions about workplace outcomes can be made by assessing both types of exclusion. On a practical level, measuring different types of exclusion may prove useful, because organizations may need to implement different interventions for addressing distinct types of exclusion.
AB - Based on the existing research, being excluded from information (i.e., being out of the loop) produces similar consequences as being ignored or excluded from activities. Consequently, one might wonder whether it is necessary to measure or study different types of exclusion in the workplace context, rather than just assessing a single type of exclusion. The current research investigated the associations between two types of workplace exclusion (i.e., being ostracized and being left out of the loop) and various workplace outcomes, with the purpose of determining whether these different types of exclusion predict unique or redundant variance in these workplace outcomes. In Study 1, we obtained a better model fit when we assigned items measuring out-of-the-loop experiences at work to a different factor than items assessing experiences with ostracism at work. In Study 2, we observed that measuring employees' experiences with being out of the loop predicted unique variance in workplace outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction), above and beyond experiences with ostracism at work. Relative weight analyses suggested that both ostracism and out-of-the-loop experiences were equally important predictors of these outcomes. Together, these studies indicate that being ostracized and being left out of the loop may be distinct exclusion experiences and better predictions about workplace outcomes can be made by assessing both types of exclusion. On a practical level, measuring different types of exclusion may prove useful, because organizations may need to implement different interventions for addressing distinct types of exclusion.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091140878&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jasp.12712
DO - 10.1111/jasp.12712
M3 - Article
C2 - 34305167
AN - SCOPUS:85091140878
VL - 51
SP - 17
EP - 31
JO - Journal of Applied Social Psychology
JF - Journal of Applied Social Psychology
SN - 0021-9029
IS - 1
ER -