How Social Dominance Orientation Affects Union Participation: The Role of Union Identification and Perceived Union Instrumentality

Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 143-156

  Green, Eva G T ^a   Auer, Fanja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Hierarchy attenuation; Perceived instrumentality; Social dominance theory; Union identification; Union participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873252987     PISSN: 10529284     EISSN: 10991298     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/casp.2111     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Aryee, S., & Chay, Y. W. (2001). Workplace justice, citizenship behaviour, and turnover intentions in a union context: Examining the mediating role of perceived union support and union instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 154-160.
2. Bamberger, P. A, Kluger, A. N., & Suchard, R. (1999). The antecedents and consequences of union commitment: A meta-analysis. The Academy of Management Journal, 42, 304-318.
3. 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.
4. Blader, S. L. (2007). What leads organizational members to collectivize? Injustice and identification as precursors of union certification. Organization Science, 18, 108-126.
5. Chaison, G. (2006). The changing role of unions: A review essay. Journal of Labor Research, 27, 423-434.
6. Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278-321.
7. Cornfield, D. B. (1991). The US labor movement: Its development and impact on social inequality and politics. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 27-49.
8. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 1-22.
9. Fullagar, C., & Barling, J. (1989). A longitudinal test of the antecedents and consequences of union loyalty. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 213-227.
10. Fullagar, C. J., Clark, P. F., Gallagher, D. G., & Carroll, A. E. (2004). Union commitment and participation: A 10year longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 730-737.
11. Gordon, M. E., Philpot, J. W., Burt, R. E., Thompson, C. A., & Spiller, W. E. (1980). Commitment to the union: Development of a measure and an examination of its correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 479-499.
12. Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N., & Duarte, S. (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 697-721.
13. Haley, H., & Sidanius, J. (2005). Person-organization congruence and the maintenance of group-based social hierarchy: A social dominance perspective. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 8, 187-203.
14. Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in organizations. The social identity approach. London: Sage.
15. Henry, P. J., Sidanius, J., Levin, S., & Pratto, F. (2005). Social dominance orientation, authoritarianism, and support for intergroup violence between the Middle East and America. Political Psychology, 26, 569-584.
16. Johnson, B. N., & Jarley, P. (2004). Justice and union participation: An extension and test of mobilization theory. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42, 543-562.
17. Kelloway E. K., & Barling, J. (1993). Member's participation in local union activities: Measurement, prediction and replication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 262-279.
18. Kelly, J. (1997). The future of trade unionism: injustice, identity and attribution. Employee Relations, 19, 400-414.
19. Kelly, C., & Breinlinger, S. (1996). The social psychology of collective action. Identity, injustice, and gender. London: Taylor & Francis.
20. Kelly, C., & Kelly, J. (1992). Who gets involved in collective action? Social psychological determinants of individual participation in trade unions. Human Relations, 47, 63-88.
21. Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Oxford: Blackwell.
22. Lehmiller, J. J., & Schmitt, M. T. (2007). Group domination and inequality in context: Evidence for the unstable meanings of social dominance and authoritarianism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 704-724.
23. Levin, S., Henry, P. J., Pratto, F., & Sidanius, J. (2003). Social dominance and social identity in Lebanon: Implications for support of violence against the West. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6, 353-368.
24. Lipset, S. M. & Katchanovski, I. (2001). The future of private sector unions in the U.S. Journal of Labor Research, 22, 229-244.
25. McFarlane Shore, L., Tetrick, L. E., Sinclair, R. R., & Newton, L. A. (1994). Validation of a measure of perceived union support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 971-977.
26. Moorman, R. H. (1991) Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845-855.
27. Morrow, P. C., & McElroy, J. C. (2006). Union loyalty antecedents: A justice perspective. Journal of Labor Research, 27, 75-87.
28. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852-863.
29. Newton, L. A., & Shore, L. M. (1992). A model of union membership: instrumentality, commitment and opposition. Academy of Management Review, 17, 275-298.
30. Panagopoulos, C., & Francia, P. L. (2008). Labor unions in the United States. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 134-159.
31. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 271-320.
32. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-763.
33. Pratto, F., Tatar, D. J., & Conway Lanz, S. (1999). Who gets what and why: Determinants of social allocations. Political Psychology, 20, 127-150.
34. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185-227.
35. Prowse, P. J., & Prowse, J. M. (2006). Are nonunion workers different to their union colleagues? Evidence from public services. Industrial Relations Journal, 37(3), 222-241.
36. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
37. Sidanius, J., Levin, S., & Pratto, F. (1996). Consensual social dominance orientation and its correlates within the hierarchical structure of American society. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 385-408.
38. Snape, E. & Redman, T. (2004). Exchange or covenant? The nature of the member-union relationship. Industrial Relations, 43, 855-873.
39. Stürmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). Collective action: Towards a dual-pathway model. European Review of Social Psychology, 15, 59-99.
40. Sverke, M., & Kuruvilla, S. (1995). A new conceptualization of union commitment: Development and test of an integrated theory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 505-532.
41. Tan, H. H., & Aryee, S. (2002). Antecedents and outcomes of union loyalty: A constructive replication and an extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 715-722.
42. Tetrick, L. E., Mc Clurg, L. N., Shore, L. M., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2007). A model of union participation: The impact of perceived union support, union instrumentality, and union loyalty. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 820-828.
43. Youngblood, S. A., DeNisi, A. S., Molleston, J. L. & Mobley, W. H. (1984). The impact of work environment, instrumentality beliefs, perceived labor union image, and subjective norms on union voting intentions. The Academy of Management Journal, 27, 576-590.