“Good pressure, bad pressure?” The double-edged sword effect of algorithmic regulatory pressure on service performance

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.1813

Abstract

Cite this article

GAO Xueyuan, ZHANG Zhipeng, XIE Baoguo, LONG Lirong, YIN Kui. (2025). “Good pressure, bad pressure?” The double-edged sword effect of algorithmic regulatory pressure on service performance. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(10), 1813-1831.

share this article

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://journal.psych.ac.cn/acps/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.1813

https://journal.psych.ac.cn/acps/EN/Y2025/V57/I10/1813

Figures/Tables 10

Figure 1. Research model.

Figure 1. Research model.

Table 1 Multiple Regression Analysis (Study 1)

Variable	Approach job crafting (Model 1)		Avoidance job crafting (Model 2)		Service performance (Model 3)
Variable	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
Control Variables
Gender	−0.08	0.08	0.07	0.16	−0.06	0.10
Age	−0.01	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.01	0.01
Education level	−0.11	0.07	−0.11	0.13	0.04	0.08
Occupational type	0.03	0.09	−0.04	0.16	0.13	0.10
Work tenure	0.04	0.04	−0.13	0.07	0.04	0.04
Proactive personality	0.21^***	0.04	−0.04	0.08	0.41^***	0.05
Social desirability bias	−0.02	0.03	0.28^***	0.06	−0.19^***	0.04
Independent Variable
Algorithmic regulatory pressure (manipulation)	0.29^***	0.07	0.58^***	0.14	0.03	0.10
Mediating Variables
Approach job crafting					0.55^***	0.07
Avoidance job crafting					−0.17^***	.04
R²	0.14^***	0.69	0.14^***	1.33	0.29^***	0.93

Table 1 Multiple Regression Analysis (Study 1)

Variable	Approach job crafting (Model 1)		Avoidance job crafting (Model 2)		Service performance (Model 3)
Variable	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
Control Variables
Gender	−0.08	0.08	0.07	0.16	−0.06	0.10
Age	−0.01	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.01	0.01
Education level	−0.11	0.07	−0.11	0.13	0.04	0.08
Occupational type	0.03	0.09	−0.04	0.16	0.13	0.10
Work tenure	0.04	0.04	−0.13	0.07	0.04	0.04
Proactive personality	0.21^***	0.04	−0.04	0.08	0.41^***	0.05
Social desirability bias	−0.02	0.03	0.28^***	0.06	−0.19^***	0.04
Independent Variable
Algorithmic regulatory pressure (manipulation)	0.29^***	0.07	0.58^***	0.14	0.03	0.10
Mediating Variables
Approach job crafting					0.55^***	0.07
Avoidance job crafting					−0.17^***	.04
R²	0.14^***	0.69	0.14^***	1.33	0.29^***	0.93

Table 2 Results of Mediation Analysis (Study 1)

Mediation effect	Indirect effect	Posterior S.D.	95% CI
H2a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance	0.16	0.05	[0.077, 0.256]
H2b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	−0.10	0.03	[−0.164, −0.045]
Overall mediation: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach/Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	0.06	0.06	[−0.050, 0.179]

Table 2 Results of Mediation Analysis (Study 1)

Mediation effect	Indirect effect	Posterior S.D.	95% CI
H2a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance	0.16	0.05	[0.077, 0.256]
H2b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	−0.10	0.03	[−0.164, −0.045]
Overall mediation: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach/Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	0.06	0.06	[−0.050, 0.179]

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations (Study 2)

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
1.Gender	—
2. Age	0.03	—
3. Education level	0.14^**	−0.03	—
4. Occupational type	0.16^***	−0.21^***	0.18^***	—
5. Work tenure	−0.03	0.48^***	−0.04	−0.35^**	—
6. Proactive personality	0.05	−0.03	0.13^*	0.03	−0.02	(0.95)
7. Algorithmic regulatory pressure	−0.02	0.10	0.04	0.03	0.06	0.29^***	(0.92)
8. Time pressure	−0.02	0.03	0.00	0.02	−0.08	0.07	0.19^***	(0.90)
9. Alienation pressure	−0.06	−0.04	0.02	0.08	−0.08	0.11	0.21^***	0.50^***	(0.88)
10. Physical & mental pressure	0.08	−0.04	0.07	0.05	−0.04	0.11^*	0.15^**	0.45^***	0.40^***	(0.84)
11. algorithmic transparency	−0.04	0.05	−0.08	−0.08	0.01	0.07	0.13^*	0.05	0.09	−0.02	(0.87)
12. online community support	−0.06	0.04	−0.03	0.02	−0.04	0.19^***	0.23^***	0.09	0.13^*	0.06	0.16^***	(0.94)
13. Approach job crafting	−0.04	−0.01	0.22^***	0.06	−0.05	0.11^*	0.30^***	0.20^***	0.14^**	0.14^*	−0.05	0.11^*	(0.94)
14. Avoidance job crafting	−0.07	0.04	0.02	−0.05	0.01	0.13^*	0.29^***	0.26^***	0.12^*	0.17^***	0.15^**	0.16^***	0.07	(0.91)
15. Service performance	0.01	−0.02	0.06	0.10	−0.06	0.13^*	0.06	0.00	0.08	0.03	−0.08	0.31^***	0.27^***	−0.14^**	—
Mean	0.26	30.67	2.69	0.27	2.86	5.65	3.29	3.76	2.67	4.03	5.58	5.75	5.76	5.37	245.59
SD	0.44	7.64	0.59	0.45	2.02	0.94	1.61	1.90	1.45	1.58	1.21	1.08	0.79	1.16	35.18

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations (Study 2)

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
1.Gender	—
2. Age	0.03	—
3. Education level	0.14^**	−0.03	—
4. Occupational type	0.16^***	−0.21^***	0.18^***	—
5. Work tenure	−0.03	0.48^***	−0.04	−0.35^**	—
6. Proactive personality	0.05	−0.03	0.13^*	0.03	−0.02	(0.95)
7. Algorithmic regulatory pressure	−0.02	0.10	0.04	0.03	0.06	0.29^***	(0.92)
8. Time pressure	−0.02	0.03	0.00	0.02	−0.08	0.07	0.19^***	(0.90)
9. Alienation pressure	−0.06	−0.04	0.02	0.08	−0.08	0.11	0.21^***	0.50^***	(0.88)
10. Physical & mental pressure	0.08	−0.04	0.07	0.05	−0.04	0.11^*	0.15^**	0.45^***	0.40^***	(0.84)
11. algorithmic transparency	−0.04	0.05	−0.08	−0.08	0.01	0.07	0.13^*	0.05	0.09	−0.02	(0.87)
12. online community support	−0.06	0.04	−0.03	0.02	−0.04	0.19^***	0.23^***	0.09	0.13^*	0.06	0.16^***	(0.94)
13. Approach job crafting	−0.04	−0.01	0.22^***	0.06	−0.05	0.11^*	0.30^***	0.20^***	0.14^**	0.14^*	−0.05	0.11^*	(0.94)
14. Avoidance job crafting	−0.07	0.04	0.02	−0.05	0.01	0.13^*	0.29^***	0.26^***	0.12^*	0.17^***	0.15^**	0.16^***	0.07	(0.91)
15. Service performance	0.01	−0.02	0.06	0.10	−0.06	0.13^*	0.06	0.00	0.08	0.03	−0.08	0.31^***	0.27^***	−0.14^**	—
Mean	0.26	30.67	2.69	0.27	2.86	5.65	3.29	3.76	2.67	4.03	5.58	5.75	5.76	5.37	245.59
SD	0.44	7.64	0.59	0.45	2.02	0.94	1.61	1.90	1.45	1.58	1.21	1.08	0.79	1.16	35.18

Table 4 Multiple Regression Analysis (Study 2)

Variable	Approach job crafting (Model 1)		Avoidance job crafting (Model 2)		Service performance (Model 3)
Variable	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
Control Variables
Gender	−0.14	0.09	−0.11	0.13	−0.46	4.03
Age	0.00	0.01	0.00	0.01	0.07	0.26
Education level	0.26^***	0.07	0.08	0.10	−0.48	3.04
Occupational type	0.00	0.10	−0.16	0.14	5.02	4.21
Work tenure	−0.01	0.02	−0.01	0.03	−0.22	1.02
Proactive personality	0.01	0.04	0.02	0.06	3.41	1.93
Time pressure	0.06^*	0.03	0.13^***	0.04	−1.23	1.14
Alienation pressure	−0.03	0.03	−0.03	0.05	0.75	1.44
Physical & mental pressure	0.03	0.03	0.02	0.04	0.85	1.27
Independent Variable
Algorithmic regulatory pressure	0.11^***	0.03	0.20^***	0.04	−1.45	1.25
Mediators
Approach job crafting					9.63^***	2.43
Avoidance job crafting					−4.57^**	1.66
Moderators
algorithmic transparency	−0.04	0.03	0.08	0.05	−2.38	1.46
online community support	0.10^*	0.04	−0.02	0.06	11.51^***	1.80
Interaction
Algorithmic regulatory pressure× algorithmic transparency	0.05^**	0.02	−0.10^***	0.03	1.80^*	0.87
Algorithmic regulatory pressure× online community support	0.08^**	0.02	−0.12^***	0.04	1.26	1.10
R²	0.21^***	0.71	0.23^***	1.04	0.23^***	31.65

Table 4 Multiple Regression Analysis (Study 2)

Variable	Approach job crafting (Model 1)		Avoidance job crafting (Model 2)		Service performance (Model 3)
Variable	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
Control Variables
Gender	−0.14	0.09	−0.11	0.13	−0.46	4.03
Age	0.00	0.01	0.00	0.01	0.07	0.26
Education level	0.26^***	0.07	0.08	0.10	−0.48	3.04
Occupational type	0.00	0.10	−0.16	0.14	5.02	4.21
Work tenure	−0.01	0.02	−0.01	0.03	−0.22	1.02
Proactive personality	0.01	0.04	0.02	0.06	3.41	1.93
Time pressure	0.06^*	0.03	0.13^***	0.04	−1.23	1.14
Alienation pressure	−0.03	0.03	−0.03	0.05	0.75	1.44
Physical & mental pressure	0.03	0.03	0.02	0.04	0.85	1.27
Independent Variable
Algorithmic regulatory pressure	0.11^***	0.03	0.20^***	0.04	−1.45	1.25
Mediators
Approach job crafting					9.63^***	2.43
Avoidance job crafting					−4.57^**	1.66
Moderators
algorithmic transparency	−0.04	0.03	0.08	0.05	−2.38	1.46
online community support	0.10^*	0.04	−0.02	0.06	11.51^***	1.80
Interaction
Algorithmic regulatory pressure× algorithmic transparency	0.05^**	0.02	−0.10^***	0.03	1.80^*	0.87
Algorithmic regulatory pressure× online community support	0.08^**	0.02	−0.12^***	0.04	1.26	1.10
R²	0.21^***	0.71	0.23^***	1.04	0.23^***	31.65

Table 5 Mediation and Moderated Mediation Analysis Results (Study 2)

Mediation Effect/Moderated Mediation	Indirect effect	Posterior S.D.	95% CI
Mediation effect
H2a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance	1.21	0.41	[0.546, 2.116]
H2b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	−0.95	0.38	[−1.800, −0.331]
Overall mediation: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach/Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	0.26	0.55	[−0.829, 1.365]
Moderated mediation
H5a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	1.94	0.58	[0.945, 3.210]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	0.49	0.45	[−0.306, 1.462]
Difference	1.41	0.64	[0.353, 2.826]
H5b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	−0.31	0.30	[−1.003, 0.161]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	−1.60	0.59	[−2.873, −0.575]
Difference	1.24	0.55	[0.379, 2.518]
H6a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	2.20	0.60	[1.142, 3.472]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	0.25	0.50	[−0.700, 1.270]
Difference	1.91	0.74	[0.671, 3.550]
H6b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	−0.31	0.29	[−0.954, 0.166]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	−1.59	0.61	[−2.961, −0.567]
Difference	1.24	0.59	[0.339, 2.621]

Table 5 Mediation and Moderated Mediation Analysis Results (Study 2)

Mediation Effect/Moderated Mediation	Indirect effect	Posterior S.D.	95% CI
Mediation effect
H2a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance	1.21	0.41	[0.546, 2.116]
H2b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	−0.95	0.38	[−1.800, −0.331]
Overall mediation: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach/Avoidance job crafting → Service performance	0.26	0.55	[−0.829, 1.365]
Moderated mediation
H5a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	1.94	0.58	[0.945, 3.210]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	0.49	0.45	[−0.306, 1.462]
Difference	1.41	0.64	[0.353, 2.826]
H5b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	−0.31	0.30	[−1.003, 0.161]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	−1.60	0.59	[−2.873, −0.575]
Difference	1.24	0.55	[0.379, 2.518]
H6a: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Approach job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	2.20	0.60	[1.142, 3.472]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	0.25	0.50	[−0.700, 1.270]
Difference	1.91	0.74	[0.671, 3.550]
H6b: Algorithmic regulatory pressure → Avoidance job crafting → Service performance
High online community support (+1 SD)	−0.31	0.29	[−0.954, 0.166]
Low online community support (−1 SD)	−1.59	0.61	[−2.961, −0.567]
Difference	1.24	0.59	[0.339, 2.621]

Figure 2. Moderating Effect of Algorithmic Transparency on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Approach Job Crafting (Study 2).

Figure 2. Moderating Effect of Algorithmic Transparency on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Approach Job Crafting (Study 2).

Figure 3. Moderating Effect of Algorithmic Transparency on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Avoidance Job Crafting (Study 2).

Figure 3. Moderating Effect of Algorithmic Transparency on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Avoidance Job Crafting (Study 2).

Figure 4. Moderating Effect of Online Community Support on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Approach Job Crafting (Study 2).

Figure 4. Moderating Effect of Online Community Support on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Approach Job Crafting (Study 2).

Figure 5. Moderating Effect of Online Community Support on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Avoidance Job Crafting (Study 2).

Figure 5. Moderating Effect of Online Community Support on the Relationship Between Algorithmic Regulatory Pressure and Avoidance Job Crafting (Study 2).

References

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Comments

Abstract
Figures/Tables
References
Related Articles
Recommended Articles
Metrics
Comments

TOP