职场负面八卦对被八卦员工行为的影响: 基于认知-情感人格系统理论的元分析

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.02681

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

近年来研究者开始关注职场负面八卦对被八卦员工行为的影响。然而, 目前关于二者关系机制的研究视角较为分散, 且研究结论存在诸多分歧。为了厘清职场负面八卦与被八卦员工行为之间的关系, 对2000年以来51个研究、61个样本的197个效应值进行了定量整合, 基于认知-情感人格系统理论构建了职场负面八卦影响员工行为的解释机制, 探索了负面八卦感知属性和文化差异在调和职场负面八卦与员工行为矛盾结论方面发挥的作用。结果表明, 职场负面八卦对被八卦员工的行为产生了消极影响, 职场负面八卦具体通过降低积极人际认知对被八卦员工的行为产生消极影响。从负面八卦感知属性的调节作用来看, 当员工感知已被负面八卦时会表现出更加消极的行为, 而当员工感知将被负面八卦时则会表现出更加积极的行为。从文化差异的调节作用来看, 西方文化情境中职场负面八卦对被八卦员工行为的负向影响弱于东方文化情境。以上结论对于研究和管理职场负面八卦都具有一定的指导意义。

关键词: 职场负面八卦, 认知-情感人格系统理论, 负面八卦感知属性, 文化差异, 员工行为

Abstract:

Negative workplace gossip (NWG) occurs when one organizational member (the gossiper) engages in informal and negative evaluative communication with another member(s) (the gossip recipient) about an absent third member(the target), and in recent years researchers have begun to focus on the effects of NWG on the behaviors of the targets. Despite the burgeoning number of studies that have explored the relationship between NWG and the targets' behaviors and its intermediate mechanisms, the explanatory perspectives of these intermediate mechanisms are fragmented and the relationships among them are not yet clear. At the same time, there are some inconsistencies in the findings on the relationship between NWG and the targets' behaviors, for example, some studies found that NWG led to a decrease in positive behaviors and an increase in negative behaviors among the targets, while others studies found that NWG increased positive behaviors and eliminated potential negative behaviors among them.
To clarify the relationship between NWG and the targets' behaviors, this study constructs a cognitive-emotional explanatory mechanism for NWG affecting the targets' behaviors based on the cognitive-affective personality system theory, and explores the role of the attributes of NWG perception and cultural differences in reconciling the contradictory findings of the relationship between NWG and the targets' behaviors. We assume that NWG can influence the behaviors of the targets through their positive interpersonal perceptions and positive affective experiences, and the differences in the perceived attributes of NWG and cultural differences may moderate the relationship between NWG and the behaviors of the targets. Then, We searched for studies related to NWG and obtained 51 empirical articles(including 61 studies, 198 effect values, 21549 samples) that met the requirements after screening, and validated the above conjectures by a two-stage structural equation modeling meta-analysis approach.
The results of the meta-analysis indicated that NWG was significantly and negatively related to the targets' positive behaviors (ρ = -0.18, p < 0.001). Positive interpersonal perceptions (indirect effect of -0.12, p < 0.001) and positive affective experiences (indirect effect of 0.01, p < 0.05) of the targets mediated the relationship between NWG and positive behaviors respectively. Specifically, NWG can reduce positive behaviors by undermining positive interpersonal perceptions of the targets, while increasing positive behaviors by damaging positive affective experiences of the targets (this is contrary to our previous hypothesis). Further analysis of the moderating effect showed that the attributes of NWG perception of the targets moderated the relationship between NWG and positive behaviors (Q_B = 59.15, p < 0.001), when targets perceived that they have been negatively gossiped, they will show fewer positive behaviors, but when they perceived that they are about to be negatively gossiped, they will show more positive behaviors; Cultural differences also moderated the relationship between NWG and positive behaviors (Q_B = 38.55, p < 0.001), in the context of Eastern culture, NWG has a stronger negative influence on the targets' positive behaviors than in the context of Western culture.
The above findings suggest that NWG has both negative and positive effects on the targets' behaviors, which has certain implications for both research and management of NWG. From a theoretical perspective, this study examined the mediating mechanisms of NWG influencing the targets' behaviors through a structural equation modeling meta-analysis approach, which helps to open the black box of how NWG influences the targets' behaviors. In addition, this study also examines the moderating effects of the attributes of NWG perception and cultural differences on the relationship between NWG and the targets' behaviors, which helps to reconcile the contradictory findings on this relationship. From a practical point of view, by playing the role of a listener, managers can obtain information that is not available through formal channels, and intervene timely to prevent NWG that is dysfunctional and may lead to negative consequences from causing a bigger organizational crisis; At the same time, managers can also use NWG to discipline potential anomie behaviors and guide employees to behave more positively.

Key words: negative workplace gossip, cognitive-affective personality system theory, attributes of negative workplace gossip perception, cultural differences, targets’ behaviors

中图分类号:

B849: C93

李黎飞, 卫旭华, 程德俊. (2022). 职场负面八卦对被八卦员工行为的影响: 基于认知-情感人格系统理论的元分析. 心理科学进展 , 30(12), 2681-2695.

LI Lifei, WEI Xuhua, CHENG Dejun. (2022). The effect of negative workplace gossip on the targets’ behaviors: A meta-analysis based on the cognitive-affective personality system theory. Advances in Psychological Science, 30(12), 2681-2695.

图/表 9

参考文献 91

	带*文献表示纳入元分析的文献
[1]	* 邓琪, 万华, 吴志成. (2019). 职场负面八卦会影响员工建言吗——人际关系压力及心理弹性的作用. 财会月刊, 16(18), 120-128.
[2]	* 杜恒波, 朱千林. (2018). 职场负面八卦对科技人员创造力的影响机制研究. 心理科学, 41(1), 125-131.
[3]	* 杜恒波, 朱千林. (2020). 职场负面八卦对员工知识隐藏的影响机制研究. 科研管理, 41(3), 264-272.
[4]	* 杜恒波, 朱千林, 刘春红. (2019). 职场负面八卦对主动性行为的影响机制研究: 一个有调节的中介模型. 管理评论, 31(2), 190-199.
[5]	* 高婧. (2018). 职场负面八卦对知识型员工创新绩效的影响研究: 员工沉默的中介作用及包容性领导风格的调节作用. 云南民族大学学报, 35(6), 88-98.
[6]	* 李黎飞. (2020). 职场负面八卦对职场偏离行为的约束作用: 有调节的中介效应模型 (硕士学位论文). 兰州大学.
[7]	李育辉, 陈佳颖, 王桢, 王雪琴. (2022). 危机下的组织沟通网络变化与知识分享行为演变:一项基于工作系统大数据的追踪研究. 中国人力资源开发, 39(02), 94-109.
[8]	* 林鑫. (2021). 职场负面八卦与知识型员工主动性行为的实证研究 (硕士学位论文). 兰州大学.
[9]	苏涛, 陈春花, 陈冰玲, 刘军, 马文聪. (2021). 职场排斥的 “四宗罪”: 中国情境下的一项元分析. 南开管理评论, 24(6), 104-116.
[10]	* 王阳. (2021). 职场负面八卦、员工沉默与员工创造力的关系研究 (硕士学位论文). 浙江工商大学, 杭州.
[11]	* 魏海鹏. (2018). 职场八卦对建言行为的影响——基于辱虐管理的视角 (硕士学位论文). 河南大学, 郑州.
[12]	* 卫旭华, 李黎飞, 杨焕. (2019). 职场负面八卦对员工创新行为的影响: 多重中介效应模型. 兰州大学学报(社会科学版), 47(4), 83-92.
[13]	温忠麟, 叶宝娟. (2014). 中介效应分析:方法和模型发展. 心理科学进展, 22(5), 731-745.
[14]	杨伟文, 李超平. (2021). 资质过剩感对个体绩效的作用效果及机制: 基于情绪-认知加工系统与文化情境的元分析. 心理学报, 53(5), 527-554.
[15]	于米. (2011). 个人-集体主义倾向与知识分享意愿之间的关系研究: 知识活性的调节作用. 南开管理评论, 14(6), 149-157.
[16]	* 俞诗佳. (2020). 职场负面八卦、人际信任与组织公民行为的关系研究——应对策略的调节作用 (硕士学位论文). 浙江工商大学, 杭州.
[17]	* 袁敏. (2021). 感知到的下属负面八卦对主管阻抑的影响研究 (硕士学位论文). 南京财经大学.
[18]	岳文忠, 吴隆增, 杨自伟, 翟海燕. (2015). 职场负面八卦的前因与后果: 基于八卦目标的视角. 心理科学进展, 23(4), 702-710.
[19]	* 岳文忠, 杨自伟, 刘春花. (2018). 职场负面八卦对员工前瞻工作行为的影响研究. 大理大学学报, 3(1), 114-123.
[20]	* 张昊民, 康娜, 马迎霜. (2020). 职场负面八卦对员工知识共享行为的影响机制研究. 上海管理科学, 42(1), 89-95.
[21]	张永军, 张鹏程, 赵君. (2017). 家长式领导对员工亲组织非伦理行为的影响: 基于传统性的调节效应. 南开管理评论, 20(2), 169-179.
[22]	* Ahmad, B., Tariq, H., Weng, Q. D., Shillamkwese, S. S., & Sohail, N. (2019). When a proximate starts to gossip: Instrumentality considerations in the emergence of abusive supervision. Employee Relations: The International Journal of Conflict Management, 41(5), 851-875.
[23]	Aquino, K., Griffeth, R. W., Allen, D. G., & Hom, P. W. (1997). Integrating justice constructs into the turnover process: A test of a referent cognitions model. Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1208-1227. doi: 10.2307/256933 URL
[24]	* Babalola, M. T., Ren, S., Kobinah, T., Qu, Y. E., Garba, O. A., & Guo, L. (2019). Negative workplace gossip: Its impact on customer service performance and moderating roles of trait mindfulness and forgiveness. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 80, 136-143. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.02.007 URL
[25]	Bai, Y., Wang, J., Chen, T., & Li, F. (2020). Learning from supervisor negative gossip: The reflective learning process and performance outcome of employee receivers. Human Relations, 73(12), 1689-1717. doi: 10.1177/0018726719866250 URL
[26]	Bayne, T., Brainard, D., Byrne, R. W., Chittka, L., Clayton, N., Heyes, C., ... Webb, B. (2019). What is cognition? Current Biology, 29(13), 608-615. doi: S0960-9822(19)30614-1 pmid: 31287972
[27]	* Beersma, B., & van Kleef, G. A. (2011). How the grapevine keeps you in line: Gossip increases contributions to the group. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(6), 642-649. doi: 10.1177/1948550611405073 URL
[28]	Bolino, M., Long, D., & Turnley, W. (2016). Impression management in organizations: Critical questions, answers, and areas for future research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 377-406. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062337 URL
[29]	Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. New Jersey, American: John Wiley & Sons.
[30]	Brady, D. L., Brown, D. J., & Liang, L. H. (2017). Moving beyond assumptions of deviance: The reconceptualization and measurement of workplace gossip. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(1), 1-25. doi: 10.1037/apl0000164 pmid: 27732002
[31]	* Chang, K., & Kuo, C. -C. (2021). Can subordinates benefit from manager’s gossip? European Management Journal, 39(4), 497-507. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.09.009 URL
[32]	* Cheng, B., Dong, Y., Zhang, Z., Shaalan, A., Guo, G., & Peng, Y. (2020). When targets strike back: How negative workplace gossip triggers political acts by employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 175, 289-302. doi: 10.1007/s10551-020-04648-5 URL
[33]	* Cheng, B., Peng, Y., Shaalan, A., & Tourky, M. (2022a). The hidden costs of negative workplace gossip: Its effect on targets’ behaviors, the mediating role of Guanxi closeness, and the moderating effect of need for affiliation. Journal of Business Ethics, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04994-y.
[34]	* Cheng, B., Peng, Y., Zhou, X., Shaalan, A., Tourky, M., & Dong, Y. (2022b). Negative workplace gossip and targets’ subjective well-being: A moderated mediation model. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.09582022.02029931.
[35]	Cheung, M. W. -L., & Chan, W. (2009). A two-stage approach to synthesizing covariance matrices in meta-analytic structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(1), 28-53. doi: 10.1080/10705510802561295 URL
[36]	Clore, G. L., & Schnall, S. (2005). The influence of affect on attitude. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & Z. M. P. (Eds.), Handbook of attitudes (pp. 437-489). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
[37]	Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R., Blaine, B., & Broadnax, S. (1994). Collective self-esteem and psychological well-being among white, black, and Asian college students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 503-513. doi: 10.1177/0146167294205007 URL
[38]	Cruz, T. D. D., Thielmann, I., Columbus, S., Molho, C., Wu, J., Righetti, F., ... Balliet, D. (2020). Gossip and reputation in everyday life. Royal Society, 376, 1-9.
[39]	* Cui, Z. (2020). The relationship between negative workplace gossip and organizational citizenship behavior: An explanation from social exchange theory. Paper presented at the meeting of International Conference on Social Science, Education and Management, Datong.
[40]	de Wit, F. R. C., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). Supplemental material for the paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 360-390. doi: 10.1037/a0024844 pmid: 21842974
[41]	Diener, E. (2009). The science of well-being. Berlin, German: Springer-Verlag.
[42]	* Durmuş, A., Kırılmaz, H., & Akboğa, Ö. Ş. (2020). Is gossip associated with nurses’ job performance perceptions? Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 15(1), 17-30.
[43]	Ellwardt, L., Labianca, G., & Wittek, R. (2012). Who are the objects of positive and negative gossip at work? : A social network perspective on workplace gossip. Social Networks, 34(2), 193-205. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2011.11.003 URL
[44]	* Fehr, D., & Sutter, M. (2016). Gossip and the efficiency of interactions. Paper presented at the meeting of Empirical and Experimental Economics, Austria.
[45]	* Feinberg, M., Willer, R., & Schultz, M. (2014). Gossip and ostracism promote cooperation in groups. Psychological Science, 25(3), 656-664. doi: 10.1177/0956797613510184 pmid: 24463551
[46]	* Feinberg, M., Willer, R., Stellar, J., & Keltner, D. (2012). The virtues of gossip: Reputational information sharing as prosocial behavior. Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 1015-1030.
[47]	Foster, E. K. (2004). Research on gossip: Taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 78-99. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.78 URL
[48]	* Georganta, K., Panagopoulou, E., & Montgomery, A. (2014). Talking behind their backs: Negative gossip and burnout in hospitals. Burnout Research, 1(2), 76-81. doi: 10.1016/j.burn.2014.07.003 URL
[49]	Grosser, T. J., Lopez-Kidwell, V., & Labianca, G. (2010). A social network analysis of positive and negative gossip in organizational life. Group & Organization Management, 35(2), 177-212.
[50]	* Guo, G., Cheng, B., Tian, J., Ma, J., & Gong, C. (2021). Effects of negative workplace gossip on unethical work behavior in the hospitality industry: The roles of moral disengagement and self-construal. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 31(3), 390-310.
[51]	Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014.
[52]	Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival). USA New York: Mc Graw Hill.
[53]	Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta- analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
[54]	* Imada, H., Hopthrow, T., & Abrams, D. (2021). The role of positive and negative gossip in promoting prosocial behavior. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 15(3), 285-291. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000218 URL
[55]	Jiang, K., Liu, D., McKay, P. F., Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (2012). When and how is job embeddedness predictive of turnover? A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 1077-1096. doi: 10.1037/a0028610 pmid: 22663557
[56]	Kenny, D. A. (2019). Interpersonal perception: The foundation of social relationships. Guilford Publications.
[57]	Khalid, B., Iqbal, R., & Hashmi, S. D. (2020). Impact of workplace ostracism on knowledge hoarding: Mediating role of defensive silence and moderating role of experiential avoidance. Future Business Journal, 6(1), 1-10. doi: 10.1186/s43093-019-0006-4 URL
[58]	* Khan, A. G., Li, Y., Akram, Z., & Akram, U. (2021). Does bad gossiping trigger for targets to hide knowledge in morally disengaged? New multi-level insights of team relational conflict. Journal of Knowledge Management, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2021-0609.
[59]	Kim, A., Moon, J., & Shin, J. (2019). Justice perceptions, perceived insider status, and gossip at work: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Business Research, 97, 30-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.038 URL
[60]	* Kong, M. (2018). Effect of perceived negative workplace gossip on employees’ behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1112-1124. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01112 URL
[61]	Kuhl, J., & Beckmann, J. (1985). Action control: From cognition to behavior. Berlin, German: Springer-Verlag.
[62]	* Kuo, C. -C., Wu, C. -Y., & Lin, C. -W. (2018). Supervisor workplace gossip and its impact on employees. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 33(1), 93-105. doi: 10.1108/JMP-04-2017-0159 URL
[63]	Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 34-47. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34 URL
[64]	* Liu, T., Wu, L., Yang, Y., & Jia, Y. (2020). Work-to-family spillover effects of workplace negative gossip: A mediated moderation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1612. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01612. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01612 URL pmid: 32774316
[65]	* Liu, X. -Y., Kwan, H. K., & Zhang, X. (2020). Introverts maintain creativity: A resource depletion model of negative workplace gossip. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 37(1), 325-344. doi: 10.1007/s10490-018-9595-7 URL
[66]	* Martin, R. J., & Hine, D. W. (2005). Development and validation of the uncivil workplace behavior questionnaire. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(4), 477-490. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.10.4.477 pmid: 16248694
[67]	* Martinescu, E., Jansen, W., & Beersma, B. (2021). Negative gossip decreases targets' organizational citizenship behavior by decreasing social inclusion: A multi-method approach. Group & Organization Management, 46(3), 463-497.
[68]	Martinescu, E., Janssen, O., & Nijstad, B. A. (2014). Tell me the gossip: The self-evaluative function of receiving gossip about others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(12), 1668-1680. doi: 10.1177/0146167214554916 pmid: 25344294
[69]	Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102(2), 246-268. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.102.2.246 pmid: 7740090
[70]	* Naeem, M., Weng, Q., Ali, A., & Hameed, Z. (2019). An eye for an eye: Does subordinates’ negative workplace gossip lead to supervisor abuse? Personnel Review, 49(1), 284-302. doi: 10.1108/PR-05-2018-0174 URL
[71]	Nieper, A., Beersma, B., T. M., Dijkstra, M., & van Kleef, G. A. (2022). When and why does gossip increase prosocial behavior? Current Opinion in Psychology, 44, 315-320. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.10.009 URL
[72]	* Romano, A., Balliet, D., & Wu, J. (2017). Unbounded indirect reciprocity: Is reputation-based cooperation bounded by group membership? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 71, 59-67. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.02.008 URL
[73]	Skogstad, A., Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M. S., & Hetland, H. (2007). The destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behavior. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(1), 80-92. pmid: 17257068
[74]	Spoelma, T. M., & Hetrick, A. L. (2021). More than idle talk: Examining the effects of positive and negative team gossip. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(5), 604-618. doi: 10.1002/job.2522 URL
[75]	Tassiello, V., Lombardi, S., & Costabile, M. (2018). Are we truly wicked when gossiping at work? The role of valence, interpersonal closeness and social awareness. Journal of Business Research, 84, 141-149. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.013 URL
[76]	* Tian, Q. -t., Song, Y., Kwan, H. K., & Li, X. (2018). Workplace gossip and frontline employees’ proactive service performance. The Service Industries Journal, 39(1), 25-42. doi: 10.1080/02642069.2018.1435642 URL
[77]	Vazsonyi, A. T., Javakhishvili, M., & Blatny, M. (2022). Does self-control outdo IQ in predicting academic performance?. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 51(3), 499-508. doi: 10.1007/s10964-021-01539-4 URL
[78]	Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1995). Theory testing: Combining psychometric meta-analysis and structural equations modeling. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 865-885. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01784.x URL
[79]	Watson, D. (1988). Intraindividual and interindividual analyses of positive and negative affect: Their relation to health complaints, perceived stress, and daily activities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1020-1030. pmid: 3397861
[80]	Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 1-74.
[81]	Wittek, R., & Wielers, R. (1998). Gossip in organizations. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 4(2), 189-204.
[82]	* Wu, J., Balliet, D., Kou, Y., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2019). Gossip in the dictator and ultimatum games: Its immediate and downstream consequences for cooperation. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 651. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00651. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00651 URL pmid: 30984073
[83]	* Wu, J., Balliet, D., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2015). When does gossip promote generosity? Indirect reciprocity under the shadow of the future. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(8), 923-930. doi: 10.1177/1948550615595272 URL
[84]	* Wu, J., Balliet, D., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2016). Reputation management: Why and how gossip enhances generosity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37(3), 193-201. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.11.001 URL
[85]	* Wu, L., Birtch, T. A., Chiang, F. F. T., & Zhang, H. (2018). Perceptions of negative workplace gossip: A self-consistency theory framework. Journal of Management, 44(5), 1873-1898. doi: 10.1177/0149206316632057 URL
[86]	* Wu, X., Kwan, H. K., Wu, L. -Z., & Ma, J. (2015). The effect of workplace negative gossip on employee proactive behavior in china: The moderating role of traditionality. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(4), 801-815. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-3006-5 URL
[87]	* Xie, J., Huang, Q., Wang, H., & Shen, M. (2019). Coping with negative workplace gossip: The joint roles of self- monitoring and impression management tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.06.025. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2019.06.025 URL
[88]	* Yao, Z., Luo, J., & Zhang, X. (2020). Gossip is a fearful thing: The impact of negative workplace gossip on knowledge hiding. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(7), 1755-1775. doi: 10.1108/JKM-04-2020-0264 URL
[89]	* Ye, C., He, B., & Sun, X. (2022). Subordinates’ negative workplace gossip leads to supervisor abuse: Based on the conservation of resources theory. Chinese Management Studies, 16(2), 315-333. doi: 10.1108/CMS-09-2020-0387 URL
[90]	* Zhou, A., Liu, Y., Su, X., & Xu, H. (2019). Gossip fiercer than a tiger: Effect of workplace negative gossip on targeted employees’ innovative behavior. Social Behavior and Personality, 47(5), e5727. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.5727.
[91]	* Zong, B., Xu, S., Zhang, L., & Qu, J. (2021). Dealing with negative workplace gossip: From the perspective of face. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 629376. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629376. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629376 URL

变量名称	包含内容
积极人际认知	地位感知、竞争力感知、核心自我评价、自我效能感知、独立性感知、情绪能力认知、去人性化知觉^、自我损耗认知^、面子威胁感知^、自尊威胁感知^、心理压力认知^、工作自主性感知、工作压力感知^、角色负荷^、领导包容性认知、领导成员交换感知、与上级心理相似性认知、宽容氛围感知、关系亲密度、人际关系压力^、社会亲密度、同事关系认知、情感信任、人际信任、认知信任、人际依附感知、工作社会支持感知、人际公平感知、排斥感知^、人际虐待感知^、团队冲突感知^、团队观点重要性、团队授权感知、组织不公平^
积极情感体验	担忧情绪^、负面情感^、负面情绪^、负面心情^、和谐激情、活力、恐惧情绪^、情绪耗竭^、情绪稳定性、声誉担忧^、心理困扰^、幸福感、忧虑^*、自尊
员工行为	遵从规范行为、创新行为、角色内行为、帮助行为、亲社会行为、主动行为、组织公民行为、建言行为、前瞻性工作行为、减少偏离行为、贡献行为、合作行为、慷慨行为、知识分享行为、知识隐藏行为^、工作家庭冲突^、沉默行为^、退缩行为^、政治行为^、不道德工作行为^、辱虐管理^、阻抑行为^

变量名称	包含内容
积极人际认知	地位感知、竞争力感知、核心自我评价、自我效能感知、独立性感知、情绪能力认知、去人性化知觉^、自我损耗认知^、面子威胁感知^、自尊威胁感知^、心理压力认知^、工作自主性感知、工作压力感知^、角色负荷^、领导包容性认知、领导成员交换感知、与上级心理相似性认知、宽容氛围感知、关系亲密度、人际关系压力^、社会亲密度、同事关系认知、情感信任、人际信任、认知信任、人际依附感知、工作社会支持感知、人际公平感知、排斥感知^、人际虐待感知^、团队冲突感知^、团队观点重要性、团队授权感知、组织不公平^
积极情感体验	担忧情绪^、负面情感^、负面情绪^、负面心情^、和谐激情、活力、恐惧情绪^、情绪耗竭^、情绪稳定性、声誉担忧^、心理困扰^、幸福感、忧虑^*、自尊
员工行为	遵从规范行为、创新行为、角色内行为、帮助行为、亲社会行为、主动行为、组织公民行为、建言行为、前瞻性工作行为、减少偏离行为、贡献行为、合作行为、慷慨行为、知识分享行为、知识隐藏行为^、工作家庭冲突^、沉默行为^、退缩行为^、政治行为^、不道德工作行为^、辱虐管理^、阻抑行为^

变量1	变量2	k	N	r	ρ	SDρ	95% CI	80%CV	Q	I²	Nfs	Egger’s intercept	p
NWG	COG	44	9443	-0.25	-0.30	0.02	[-0.37, -0.22]	[-0.56, 0.03]	936.07^***	95.41%	4637	3.50	0.39
	AFF	30	7254	-0.29	-0.34	0.01	[-0.39, -0.28]	[-0.51, -0.14]	285.15^***	89.83%	8747	-3.16	0.27
	BEH^a	61	19925	-0.15	-0.18	0.02	[-0.26, -0.10]	[-0.55, 0.25]	2673.27^***	97.68%	960	-5.20	0.15
	BEH1	10	3956	-0.28	-0.33	0.02	[-0.44, -0.21]	[-0.54, -0.08]	153.50^***	94.14%	1063	-5.03	0.39
	BEH2	14	6082	0.21	0.25	0.01	[0.18, 0.32]	[0.08, 0.41]	117.77 ^***	88.96%	1296	1.02	0.73
	BEH3	6	1981	-0.29	-0.35	0.04	[-0.52, -0.16]	[-0.60, -0.05]	106.44^***	95.30%	378	-22.89	0.23
	BEH4	3	1009	-0.31	-0.39	0.13	[-0.67, -0.02]	[-0.69, 0.03]	79.72^***	97.49%	132	4.05	0.94
	BEH5	3	568	0.30	0.33	0.01	[0.22, 0.44]	[0.24, 0.42]	4.36	54.15%	48	-9.99	0.04
	BEH6	4	1606	0.30	0.35	0.02	[0.20, 0.48]	[0.16, 0.52]	33.29^***	90.99%	212	4.37	0.85
	BEH7	4	1149	0.35	0.42	0.09	[0.14, 0.65]	[0.05, 0.69]	81.74^***	96.33%	227	-2.47	0.87
	BEH8	11	3987	-0.24	-0.28	0.03	[-0.40, -0.14]	[-0.52, 0.01]	197.51^***	94.94%	784	-6.35	0.33
	BEH9	6	1936	0.36	0.42	0.03	[0.28, 0.55]	[0.20, 0.60]	65.85^***	92.41%	566	22.82	0.13
COG	AFF	11	2405	0.24	0.29	0.03	[0.15, 0.41]	[-0.02, 0.54]	222.29^***	95.50%	1075	-17.50	0.08
COG	BEH	33	6793	0.32	0.41	0.06	[0.26, 0.54]	[-0.19, 0.79]	2616.46^***	98.78%	6658	7.32	0.40
AFF	BEH	18	4476	0.10	0.11	0.05	[-0.05, 0.27]	[-0.33, 0.51]	691.64^***	97.54%	331	-0.10	0.99

变量1	变量2	k	N	r	ρ	SDρ	95% CI	80%CV	Q	I²	Nfs	Egger’s intercept	p
NWG	COG	44	9443	-0.25	-0.30	0.02	[-0.37, -0.22]	[-0.56, 0.03]	936.07^***	95.41%	4637	3.50	0.39
	AFF	30	7254	-0.29	-0.34	0.01	[-0.39, -0.28]	[-0.51, -0.14]	285.15^***	89.83%	8747	-3.16	0.27
	BEH^a	61	19925	-0.15	-0.18	0.02	[-0.26, -0.10]	[-0.55, 0.25]	2673.27^***	97.68%	960	-5.20	0.15
	BEH1	10	3956	-0.28	-0.33	0.02	[-0.44, -0.21]	[-0.54, -0.08]	153.50^***	94.14%	1063	-5.03	0.39
	BEH2	14	6082	0.21	0.25	0.01	[0.18, 0.32]	[0.08, 0.41]	117.77 ^***	88.96%	1296	1.02	0.73
	BEH3	6	1981	-0.29	-0.35	0.04	[-0.52, -0.16]	[-0.60, -0.05]	106.44^***	95.30%	378	-22.89	0.23
	BEH4	3	1009	-0.31	-0.39	0.13	[-0.67, -0.02]	[-0.69, 0.03]	79.72^***	97.49%	132	4.05	0.94
	BEH5	3	568	0.30	0.33	0.01	[0.22, 0.44]	[0.24, 0.42]	4.36	54.15%	48	-9.99	0.04
	BEH6	4	1606	0.30	0.35	0.02	[0.20, 0.48]	[0.16, 0.52]	33.29^***	90.99%	212	4.37	0.85
	BEH7	4	1149	0.35	0.42	0.09	[0.14, 0.65]	[0.05, 0.69]	81.74^***	96.33%	227	-2.47	0.87
	BEH8	11	3987	-0.24	-0.28	0.03	[-0.40, -0.14]	[-0.52, 0.01]	197.51^***	94.94%	784	-6.35	0.33
	BEH9	6	1936	0.36	0.42	0.03	[0.28, 0.55]	[0.20, 0.60]	65.85^***	92.41%	566	22.82	0.13
COG	AFF	11	2405	0.24	0.29	0.03	[0.15, 0.41]	[-0.02, 0.54]	222.29^***	95.50%	1075	-17.50	0.08
COG	BEH	33	6793	0.32	0.41	0.06	[0.26, 0.54]	[-0.19, 0.79]	2616.46^***	98.78%	6658	7.32	0.40
AFF	BEH	18	4476	0.10	0.11	0.05	[-0.05, 0.27]	[-0.33, 0.51]	691.64^***	97.54%	331	-0.10	0.99

变量	NWG	COG	AFF	BEH
NWG	1.00
COG	-0.30^***	1.00
AFF	-0.34^***	0.29^***	1.00
BEH	-0.18^***	0.41^***	0.11	1.00