A social exchange model of employee reactions to electronic performance monitoring

Human Performance

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 204-224

  McNall, Laurel A ^a   Roch, Sylvia G ^b  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449589417     PISSN: 08959285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08959280902970385     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Aiello, J. (1993). Computer-based work monitoring: Electronic surveillance and its effects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 499-507.
2. Aiello, J., & Shao, Y. (1993). Electronic performance monitoring and stress: The role of feedback and goal setting. In M. J. Smith&G. Savendy (Eds.), Human-computer interaction: Applications and case studies (pp. 1011-1016). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
3. Alder, S. (1998). Ethical issues in electronic performance monitoring: A consideration of deontological and teleological perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 729-743.
4. Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2005a). An examination of the effect of computerized performance monitoring feedback on monitoring fairness, performance, and satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 161-177.
5. Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2005b). Towards understanding fairness judgments associated with computer performance onitoring: An integration of the feedback, justice and monitoring literature. Human Resource Management Review,15, 43-67.
6. Alder, G. S., & Tompkins, P. (1997). Electronic performance monitoring: An organizational justice and concertive control erspective. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 259-288
7. Alge, B. (2001). Effects of computer surveillance on perceptions of privacy and procedural justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 797-804.
8. Ambrose, M. L., & Alder, G. S. (2000). Designing, implementing and utilizing computerized performance monitoring: Enhancing organizational justice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 18, 187-219.
9. Ambrose, M., Alder, S., & Noel, T. (1998). Electronic performance monitoring: A consideration of rights. In M. Schminke (Ed.), Managerial ethics: Moral management of people & process (pp. 61-79). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. American Management Association/ePolicy Institute. (2005). 2005 Electronic monitoring & surveillance survey. Retrieved December 27, 2006, from http://www.amanet.org/research/pdfs/EMS_summary05.pdf
11. Arbuckle, J. L. & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS users' guide (Version 4.0). Chicago: Small Waters.
12. Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 267-285.
13. Baron, R. A. (1988). Negative effects of destructive criticism: Impact on conflict, self-efficacy, and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 199-207.
14. Baron, R. A. (1993). Criticism (informal negative feedback) as a source of perceived unfairness in organizations: Effects, mechanisms, and counter measures. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 155-170). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
16. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural equation modeling. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
17. Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Shepard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
18. Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1987). Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts. Social Justice Research, 1, 199-218.
19. Bies, R. J.,&Shapiro, D. L. (1988). Voice and justification: Their influence on procedural fairness judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 676-685.
20. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
21. Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen&J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
22. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Chalykoff, J., & Kochan, T.A. (1989). Computer-aided monitoring: Its influence on employee job satisfaction and turnover. Personnel Psychology, 42, 807-834.
24. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Colquitt, J. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386-400.
26. Colquitt, J., Conlon, D., Wesson, M., Porter, C., & Ng, K. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of the 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.
27. Dipboye, R. L (1990). Laboratory vs. field research in industrial and organizational psychology. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 1-34). New York:Wiley & Sons.
28. Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628.
29. Douthitt, E. A., & Aiello, J.R. (2001). The role of participation and control in the effects of computer monitoring on fairness perceptions, task satisfaction, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 867-874.
30. Eisenman, E. J. (1986). Employee perceptions and supervisory behaviors in clerical VDT work on systems that allow electronic monitoring (OTA-CIT-333). Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment.
31. George, S., & Weimerskirch, A. (1998). Total quality management: Strategies and techniques proven at today's most successful companies. New York: Wiley & Sons.
32. Grant, R. A., Higgins, C. A., & Irving, R. H. (1988). Computerized performance monitors: Are they costing you customers? Sloan Management Review, 29(3), pp. 39-45.
33. Greenberg, J., Bies, R. J., & Eskew, D. E. (1990). Establishing fairness in the eye of the beholder. In R. A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Applied impression management (pp. 111-132). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
34. Griffith, T. L. (1993). Teaching big brother to be a team player: computer monitoring and quality. Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 73-80.
35. House, J. S., McMichael, A. J., Wells, J. A., Kaplan, B. N., & Landerman, L. R. (1979). Occupational stress and health among factory workers. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 20, 139-160.
36. Hu, L-T. & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
37. Jawahar, I. M.,&Williams, C. R. (1997). Where all the children are above average: The performance appraisal purpose effect. Personnel Psychology, 50, 905-925.
38. Katzell, R. A., Thompson, D. E., & Guzzo, R. A. (1992). How job satisfaction and job performance are and are not linked. In C. J. Cranny, P. C. Smith, & E. F. Stone (Eds.), Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects their performance (pp. 195-218). Oxford, UK: Lexington Books.
39. Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (2000). Performance appraisal reactions: Measurement, modeling, and method bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 708-723.
40. Kenny, D. A. (2003). Measuring model fit. Retrieved April 17, 2007, from http://davidakenny.net/cm/fit.htm
41. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 233-265). New York: McGraw-Hill.
42. Kernan, M. C., & Hanges, P. J. (2002). Survivor reactions to reorganization: Antecedents and consequences of procedural, interpersonal and informational justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 916-928.
43. Kidwell, R., & Bennett, N. (1994). Electronic surveillance as employee control: A procedural justice interpretation. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 5, 39-57.
44. Kirkpatrick, S. A. & Locke, E. A. (1996). Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic leadership components on performance and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 36-51.
45. Kulik, C. T., & Ambrose, M. L. (1993). The impact of computerized performance monitoring design features on the performance appraisal process. Journal of Managerial Issues, 5, 182-197.
46. Levy, P. E., &Williams, J.R. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of Management, 30, 881-905.
47. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
48. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size of covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
49. Maruyama, G. M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. McNall, L. A., & Roch, S. G. (2007). Effects of electronic monitoring type on perceptions of procedural justice, interpersonal justice and privacy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 658-682.
51. Nebeker, D. M., & Tatum, C. B. (1993). The effects of computer monitoring, standards and rewards on work performance, job satisfaction and stress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 508-536.
52. Nussbaum, K., & duRivage, V. (1986, Winter). Computer monitoring: Mismanagement by remote control. Business and Society Review, 56, 16-20.
53. Preacher, K. J., & Coffman, D. L. (2006, May). Computing power and minimum sample size for RMSEA [Computer software] Available from http://www.quantpsy.org
54. Roch, S. G., & Shanock, L. R. (2006). Organizational justice in an exchange framework: Clarifying organizational justice distinctions. Journal of Management, 32, 299-322.
55. Shaw, R. B. (1997). Trust in the balance: Building successful organizations on results, integrity and concern. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
56. Smith, M., Carayon, P., Sanders, K., Lim, S-Y., & LeGrande, D. (1992). Employee stress and health complaints in jobs with and without electronic performance monitoring. Applied Ergonomics, 23, 17-27.
57. Stanton, J. (2000a). Reactions to employee performance monitoring: Framework, review and research directions. Human Performance, 13 (1), 85-113.
58. Stanton, J. (2000b). Traditional and electronic monitoring from an organizational justice perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15, 129-146.
59. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
60. Tucker, L.R. & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrics, 38, 1-10.
61. Tyler, T. R., & Degoey, P. (1996). Trust in organizational authorities: The influence of motive attributions on willingness to accept decisions. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 331-356). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
62. Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (2005). Is there a general factor in ratings of job performance? A metaanalytic framework for disentangling substantive and error influences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 108-131.
63. Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A., & Werner, J.M. (1998). Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review, 23, 513-531.