Although much is known of the observable physical tasks associated with household management and child rearing, there is scant understanding of the less visible tasks that are just as critical. Grounding our research in the extant literature, the broader lay discussion, as well as our own qualitative research, we define, conceptualize, and operationalize this construct, which we label as "." Using a mixed method, five-study approach, we offer a comprehensive, multidimensional definition and provide a nine-item, empirically validated scale to measure its component parts-, , and family load. In addition, we investigate gender differences and find, as expected, that women report higher levels of each dimension. We also examine the implications of invisible family load for employee health, well-being, and job attitudes, as well as family-to-work spillover. Although we substantiated some significant negative consequences, contrary to the popular view that consequences of invisible family load are uniformly negative, our results show some potential benefits. Even after accounting for conscientiousness and neuroticism, managerial family load related to greater family-work enrichment, and cognitive family load related to greater family satisfaction and job performance. Yet, emotional family load had uniformly negative potential consequences including greater family-to-work conflict, sleep problems, family and job exhaustion, and lower life and family satisfaction. Our research sets the stage for scholars to forge a path forward to enhance understanding of this phenomenon and its implications for individuals, their families, and the organizations for which they work.

Prior research has framed bootlegging as employees' unofficial innovation that occurs without organizational authorization or official support. In this paper, we call for bringing leadership back into the study of antecedents of bootlegging and examine the effects of leadership context, specifically leader humility, on employee bootlegging. Following the conservation of resources (COR) theory, we propose that leader humility can provide valuable endogenous resources, such as relational energy, for employee bootlegging. We also propose that work unit structure (organic versus mechanistic) can serve as a boundary condition in this relationship. We test our hypotheses in (i) a scenario-based experiment, (ii) a three-wave time-lagged study with a sample of 212 employees, and (iii) a three-wave time-lagged study with a sample of 190 employees embedded in 20 teams. The results show that leader humility positively relates to relational energy, which, in turn, causes employee bootlegging. Furthermore, an organic structure strengthens the relationship between relational energy and bootlegging, and the indirect effect of leader humility on employee bootlegging via relational energy. The paper concludes with a discussion of what these findings suggest for future research and managerial practice.

Competence-questioning communication at work has been described as gender-linked (e.g., mansplaining) and as impacting the way women perceive and experience the workplace. Three studies were conducted to investigate how the specific communication behaviors of condescending explanation (i.e., mansplaining), voice nonrecognition, and interruption can be viewed as gender-biased in intention by receivers. The first study was a critical incident survey to describe these competence-questioning behaviors when enacted by men toward women in the workplace and how women react toward them. Studies 2 and 3 used experimental paradigms (in online and laboratory settings, respectively) to investigate how women and men perceive and react to these behaviors when enacted by different genders. Results demonstrated that when faced with condescending explanation, voice nonrecognition, or interruption, women reacted more negatively and were more likely to see the behavior as indicative of gender bias when the communicator was a man. Implications for improving workplace communications and addressing potential gender biases in communication in organizations are discussed.

Researchers continue to debate about how high-status and low-status members will divide into subgroups. The purpose of this research is to enrich the faultline, subgroup, and status literature by specifying how and why status-based subgroups (i.e., subgroups based on status positions) are formed within a team. This research employed a grounded theory approach and conducted interviews with 111 individuals distributed over 21 work teams in Chinese highly competitive industries. The results identify two typical formation patterns of the status-based subgroup: vertical stratification that indicates team members vertically split into different subgroups along status hierarchies, and horizontal polarization that indicates team members at the same status horizontally divided into different subgroups. Furthermore, the results distinguish different sources for the formation of stratified and polarized status-based subgroups. This study expands faultline and subgroup literature by identifying multiple formation patterns and sources of status-based subgroup, and contributes to status literature by clarifying how high-status and low-status members will bound together or split within a work team.

Various job demands continuously threaten Emergency Medical Service (EMS) first responders' safety and wellbeing. Drawing on Job Demands-Resources Theory, the present study examines the effects of the organizational context-safety climate-and the psychological context-emotional exhaustion-on safety behaviors and wellbeing over time. We tested our hypotheses in a longitudinal study of 208 EMS first responders nested within 45 stations from three fire departments in US metropolitan areas over 6 months during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Multilevel modeling showed that the relationship between safety climate and safety compliance behaviors can be attenuated when EMS first responders experience high emotional exhaustion. Emotional exhaustion was also negatively associated with morale while safety climate was positively associated with morale. Additionally, EMS first responders experienced increased depression when their emotional exhaustion levels were high. Higher safety climate was associated with decreased depression when emotional exhaustion was within a low-to-medium range. Higher safety climate was also associated with lower absolute levels of depression across the entire range of emotional exhaustion. These findings suggest that promoting safety climate and mitigating emotional exhaustion can augment EMS first responders' safety behaviors and wellbeing.].

Crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, require rapid action to be taken by leaders, despite minimal understanding of the impact of implemented crisis management policies and procedures in organizations. This study's purpose was to establish a greater understanding of which perceived crisis response strategies were the most beneficial or detrimental to relevant perceptions and outcomes during the recent COVID-19 crisis. Using a time-lagged study design and a sample of 454 healthcare employees, latent profile analysis was used to identify strategy profiles used by organizations based on several policy/procedure categories (i.e., human-resource supportive, human-resource disadvantaging, behavioral/interactional human safety and protection-focused, and environmental and structural safety supports-focused policies and procedures). Results indicated that four perceived crisis response strategies were employed: (1) human resource-disadvantaging, (2) maximizing, (3) safety and human resource-supportive, and (4) inactive. Perceived crisis response strategy was linked to several employee well-being (e.g., work stress) and behavioral (e.g., safety behavior) outcomes via proximal perceptions (i.e., perceived organizational support, ethical leadership, and safety climate). Proximal perceptions were the most positive for employees within organizations that enacted safety and human resource-supportive policies and procedures or that utilized a maximizing approach by implementing a wide array of crisis response policies and procedures. This paper contributes to the literature by providing crucial information needed to reduce organizational decision-making time in the event of future crises.

The current paper proposed individual differences in judgment and decision-making (JDM)-namely, the skill associated with recognizing social norms, decision-making styles, and risk-benefit perceptions-as a novel set of predictors of counterproductive work behavior (CWB). We hypothesized that the skill associated with recognizing social norms, rational decision-making style, and perceived riskiness of unethical behavior would be related negatively to CWB, whereas the avoidant decision-making style, spontaneous decision-making style, and perceived benefits of unethical behavior would be related positively to CWB. Moreover, we hypothesized that JDM-focused individual differences would exhibit incremental validity above and beyond the traditional individual difference predictors of CWB (personality, trait affect, and cognitive ability). Results from three independent samples provided strong support for the hypotheses. The strongest predictor of CWB was individual differences in perceived benefits of unethical behavior (meta-analytic correlation across the three samples = .487). This result suggests a simple insight, yet one almost completely missing from the existing CWB literature: People who believe unethical behavior is likely to benefit them will tend to enact more CWB than those who do not. Additionally, across the three samples, the novel JDM-focused individual difference predictors performed well in comparison to the traditional individual difference predictors, suggesting their usefulness to research and practice. We therefore suggest several avenues for future research on JDM-focused individual differences as predictors of CWB. Additionally, vis-à-vis practical implications, we discuss the possibility of using JDM-focused individual differences in employee selection and organizational intervention contexts with the aim of reducing CWB.

We use the conservation of resources (COR) theory to propose a work-family model of stress in remote work. We propose that interruptions from family are a unique hindrance stressor, detrimental for the employee's challenge and hindrance stress responses in remote work, which, in turn, have distinct effects on resource-oriented attitudes and states of both the employee and spouse. Namely, we expect that both partners' satisfaction with the work arrangement, employee engagement, and spouse family overload will be associated with the way the employee experiences stress in remote work (stress response). We also integrate the effort-recovery model to examine whether two types of breaks taken by employees while working remotely replenish resources lost through interruptions. Using a sample of 391 couples, we find support for all hypotheses that pertain to the employee. Findings involving the spouse support the primacy of the resource loss tenet in COR theory, in that these detrimental effects are significant in crossing over to the spouse via hindrance but are not significant via challenge stress. We discuss the implications of these findings, emphasizing that interruptions are harmful for both types of stress experienced by remote employees (i.e., lower "good" and higher "bad" stress responses), and interruptions appear to have far-reaching effects on both partners. However, choosing to use breaks for both nonwork goals and self-care can buffer these otherwise detrimental effects.

Widespread concern has been raised about the possibility of potential biasing factors influencing the measurement of organizational variables and distorting inferences and conclusions reached about them. Recent research calls for a measure-centric approach in which every measure is independently evaluated to assess what factor(s) may uniquely bias it. This paper examines three popular stressor measures from this perspective. Across three studies, we examine factors that may bias three popular measures of job stressors: The Interpersonal Conflict at Work Scale (ICAWS), the Organizational Constraints Scale (OCS), and the Quantitative Workload Inventory (QWI). The first study used a two-wave design to survey 276 MTurk workers to assess the three stressor scales, four strains, and five measures of potential bias sources: hostile attribution bias, negative affectivity, mood, neutral objects satisfaction, and social desirability. The second study used an experimental design with 439 MTurk workers who were randomly assigned to a positive, negative, or no mood induction condition to assess effects on means of the three stressor measures and their correlations with strains. The third study surveyed 161 employee-supervisor dyads to explore the convergence of results involving the three stressor measures across sources. Based on several forms of evidence we conclude that potential biasing factors affect the three stressor measures differently, supporting the merits of a measure centric approach, even among measures in the same domain.

Work-family conflict has become one of the most prominent challenges of modern-day work and a prominent research topic. However, the "family" in the work-family interface has been undertheorized, while research focuses on the workplace factors and individual characteristics in relation to work-family conflict (WFC). Placing the family at the center of theorizing, we adopt the Contextual Model of Family Stress (CMFS) as an overarching framework, which conceptualizes the family as a complex system comprising the family members, the environment in which they are situated, and their interactions with the environment and with one another. Guided by CMFS, we theorized WFC as a disturbance to the family's structural and psychological contexts, which creates strain on the family well-being. Furthermore, we argued that family strain could produce strain and stress back to the focal workers, which reduces their voice behaviors at work. We further argue that workers' work-family segmentation preference will shape their experience of WFC and moderate the indirect effect of WFC on employee voice behavior through family well-being. We collected data across two multi-wave, time-lagged surveys in America (M-Turk,  = 330) and in China (organization employees,  = 209). We found that employee-rated family well-being mediates the negative relationship between WFC and voice behavior, and the indirect relationship is stronger as the employees' preference for segmentation is higher. The results open up a promising avenue for more nuanced inquiry into the family system framework and its role in the work-family interface.

Occupational health and safety are critical in promoting the wellness of organizations and employees. The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most life-threatening viruses encountered in recent history, providing a unique opportunity for research to examine factors that drive employee safety behavior. Drawing from terror management theory, we propose and test a moderated mediation model using data collected from employees working during a peak of the pandemic. We identify two sources of influence - one external (i.e., media exposure), and one internal (i.e., HR practices) to the organization - that shape employees' mortality salience and safety behaviors. We find that COVID-19 HR practices significantly moderate the relationship between daily COVID-19 media exposure and mortality salience, with media exposure positively associated with mortality salience at lower levels of HR practices but its effects substituted by higher levels of HR practices. Moreover, our results also show that mortality salience spurs safety behaviors, with age moderating this relationship such that younger - but not older - employees are more likely to engage in safety behaviors due to mortality salience. Taken together, we offer theoretical implications for the safety behavior literature and practical implications for organizations faced with health crises or having employees who commonly work in hazardous conditions.

Work-school conflict is a major stressor for many college students who have paid jobs while in college. Although work-school conflict experience is dynamic, the extant research has predominantly cast it and its consequences as between-person phenomena from a static perspective, ignoring its inherent temporal nature. As a result, little is known about the intra-individual changes in work-school conflict and their associated consequences as implied by the related theory. Drawing on the stressor-emotion model of counterproductive work behavior, we conducted a longitudinal weekly diary study to examine how work-school conflict change can predict changes in negative emotions and workplace deviance (i.e., the change-to-change effects). We also tested core self-evaluation, time management skill, and financial well-being as moderators of the proposed mediated relationship. Results from latent change score modeling showed that upward work-school conflict change had a positive relationship with upward workplace deviance change via upward changes in negative emotions. Further, time management skill and financial well-being weakened the indirect relationships between upward work-school conflict change and upward workplace deviance change. However, the moderating nature of core self-evaluation on the indirect relationship contrasted with our hypothesis. Implications for theory and future research are discussed along with implications for organizations and college institutions.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by a sharp increase in prejudice and discrimination targeting Asian Americans in the USA. Thus, in addition to the public health risks associated with the virus, exposure to discrimination poses a unique threat to the health and well-being of Asian Americans. Indeed, empirical evidence has documented the linkage between experiencing anti-Asian discrimination during the pandemic and health decrements among Asian Americans. The goal of this study was to expand that research to also consider the ways experiencing discrimination in a nonwork context may spill over to affect the general and job-related well-being of Asian American employees as well as the potential mitigating role of coworker compassion. Results from a sample of 311 Asian American employees demonstrated that experiencing nonwork discrimination was associated with decrements in physical health and increased depression and job-related exhaustion. Further, there were significant interactions between nonwork discrimination and coworker compassion for engagement, emotional exhaustion, and depressive symptoms such that nonwork discrimination was more strongly related to each outcome when coworker compassion was low. The findings from the current study suggest that experiences of racial derogation, even those that occur outside the workplace environment, are detrimental to the well-being of employees and that coworker compassion is a positive resource that may foster healthier and more inclusive work environments.

Employees must often perform work outside of the time and/or space requirements that typically define their job role (e.g., working after-hours, teleworking), especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. We introduce the concept of to capture this idea and draw on situational strength theory to test the seemingly paradoxical hypotheses that (1) the effects of extra-normative work are more harmful to employee strain when this work represents a stronger situation (i.e., one that unambiguously prescribes expected behavior), relative to when this work represents a weaker situation (i.e., one that allows for greater personal choice and behavioral latitude), but that (2) this strain is diminished when situational strength is achieved by maximizing the clarity and consistency of extra-normative work, while this strain is enhanced when situational strength is achieved by imposing greater constraints and consequences surrounding extra-normative work. These predictions were supported in an experimental vignette study, a survey focused on after-hours work experiences, and an investigation of telework in response to COVID-19. We discuss the theoretical implications of viewing extra-normative work through the lens of situational strength, while also outlining how our findings inform best practices surrounding how to communicate about and frame extra-normative work to employees.

Thus far, research on perceived overqualification has focused on either maladaptive, strain-based versus more adaptive, self-regulatory reactions in isolation. Following person-environment fit theory, we seek to advance this one-sided focus by uniting both types of adjustment reactions and to consider their implications for perceived person-job fit, and performance and wellbeing outcomes. In line with theory, we also examine contextual boundary conditions in the form of indicators of formal work arrangements (i.e., permanent vs. temporary employment contract and job tenure). Utilizing three-wave data from 453 employees, we found that perceived overqualification indirectly and sequentially related to decreases in task performance, organizational citizenship behavior and job satisfaction via anger toward employment situation and lower levels of perceived person-job fit-thus reflecting the strain-based pathway. For the self-regulatory pathway, findings did not align with our initial proposition that the positive relationship between perceived overqualification and work organization (a form of structural job crafting whereby employees improve their work processes) would be weaker among temporary employees and those with longer tenure. Instead, having a temporary employment contract or having longer job tenure resulted in a negative relationship between perceived overqualification and work organization, which further contributed to a decrease in performance and satisfaction via lower levels of perceived person-job fit. Our study highlights the demotivating role of a temporary employment contract and long job tenure for overqualified employees to reorganize their work. In discussing our findings, we point to the importance of job stage and develop recommendations for managing overqualified employees.

Despite increased media coverage of police using lethal force against Black civilians, little research aims to understand how such events affect employees, particularly Black employees, at work. We draw on -transferring emotions and/or behaviors from one domain to another-to examine how collective, indirect trauma, or trauma experienced by a large group of people not directly involved in an event, affected employees at work. Across two studies, we investigated Black and White employees' differential cognitive (Study 1), emotional, and interpersonal reactions (Studies 1 & 2) to hearing about police officers' use of lethal force against Black civilians (i.e., collective, indirect racial trauma). Results from a survey with open- and close-ended questions (Study 1) supported our predictions that Black (vs. White) employees would be more upset about police shootings and would think about, talk about, and be more distracted by these incidents while at work. Open-ended responses revealed , seeking advice and comfort from our social networks, as a strategy Black and White employees may use to cope with collective, indirect racial trauma at work. Importantly, support communicating -or shared perspective-was particularly important for Black employees. An experiment (Study 2) further probed the emotional and relational consequences of interactions with coworkers and, counter to predictions, found coworkers who expressed pro-police attitudes (i.e., not communicating mutual understanding) in the aftermath of a racially biased shooting were negatively evaluated by Black and White employees. Our findings provide implications for research on spillover and understanding coworker/team dynamics in organizations.

Although breaks can help employees stay energized and maintain high levels of performance throughout the day, employees sometimes refrain from taking a break despite wanting to do so. Unfortunately, few studies have investigated individuals' reasons for taking and for taking a break at work. To address this gap, we developed a model for predicting employees' break-taking behaviors. We developed hypotheses by integrating theories of work stress, self-regulation, and the results of a qualitative survey conducted as part of the current research (Study 1). Specifically, we predicted that high workloads would be positively related to the to detach from work, but that at the same time, high workloads would also deter employees from taking breaks. Furthermore, we predicted that employees would be less likely to act upon their desire to take a break within an environment where breaks are frowned upon by supervisors and coworkers, relative to an environment where breaks are allowed and encouraged. The results of a daily diary study of full-time employees (Study 2) provided general support for these predictions. Altogether, this research provides insights into the manner in which employees' psychological experiences and characteristics of the work environment combine to predict break-taking.

Anti-Black racism is a specific form of racism directed at Black people. In healthcare, there are poignant examples of anti-Black racism in the recruitment, selection, and retention stages of the job cycle. Research shows that anti-Black racism is associated with inequitable work outcomes and the under-representation of Black physicians. However, empirical findings are scattered with no organizing framework to consolidate these findings. To add to the literature, in this paper we present the attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) model (Schneider, 1987) as an organizing framework to discuss Black physicians' experiences with anti-Black racism and discrimination throughout their careers. We draw from previous literature to highlight specific experiences of Black physicians at each stage of the job cycle (i.e., attraction, selection, retention), and we offer considerations on how practitioners can mitigate anti-Black racism throughout the job cycle. In the wake of COVID-19 and highly publicized social justice movements, healthcare systems are seeking ways to increase the recruitment, selection, and retention of Black physicians to ensure health equity. We believe this guide will be valuable to practitioners, leaders, researchers, and program directions seeking to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion of Black physicians in their healthcare systems. We conclude by providing practical implications and directions for future research.

Anti-Black racism is a pernicious problem that has plagued the USA throughout history. In 2020, we saw intense moments that highlighted the stark anti-Black racism and racial inequity in America. Namely, the murder of George Floyd coupled with the disproportionate levels of negative outcomes from the COVID-19 pandemic affecting Black people in the USA. These instances called attention to the considerable racial inequality in US society and reminded many people that racism seeps throughout all facets of life. Our first goal with this special issue was to call attention to research within in the organizational sciences that focuses on anti-Black racism. The articles in this issue call attention to some of the manifestations and consequences of anti-Black racism as well as ways to reduce its insidious effects. Our second goal was to intentionally highlight the work of Black scholars in the field of I-O psychology. As such, we engaged in targeted recruiting that allowed us to successfully curate articles from a racially diverse group of scholars, and we are able to highlight the work of Black scholars and practitioners in the field.

Organizational leaders can make a large, positive impact on their employees during crises. However, existing research demonstrates that social support is not always effective in helping employees cope with stress, and existing research has not fully identified features of support attempts that determine their effectiveness. Using mixed methods, the authors investigate the efficacy of organizational leaders' support efforts during a crisis. In the first study, 571 employees (196 university administrative staff, 192 licensed nurses, and 183 licensed engineers) described actions their leaders engaged in to support them during a global pandemic. Nine themes differentiated helpful from unhelpful leadership support: autonomy, changes, communication, personal resources, safety, timing, tone, work equipment, and workload. Study 2 used a quantitative methodology (162 licensed nurses and 239 licensed engineers) to demonstrate that leadership actions employees deemed as helpful in Study 1 were associated with less employee burnout and fewer physical symptoms. Drawing from emerging social support literature and the stressor-strain model, the findings inform optimal leadership support practices during crises.

Despite decades of research on trust in the workplace, researchers continue to struggle with fundamental questions regarding the conceptualization and measurement of organizational trust. To help clarify this construct, we revisit established trust definitions (Mayer et al. (3), 709-734, Mayer et al., Academy of Management Review 20:709-734, 1995; Rousseau et al. (3), 393-404, Rousseau et al., Academy of Management Review 23:393-404, 1998) and distinguish trust attitudes (i.e., positive expectations of others) from trust intentions (i.e., the willingness to be vulnerable). Using a three-study experimental design, we examined the causal effect of two distinct trust attitudes (i.e., cognition-based and affect-based) on two trust intentions (i.e., reliance and disclosure). We found that when cognition-based trust was high, participants were more willing to rely on a colleague (i.e., had higher reliance intentions). When affect-based trust was high, participants were more willing to share sensitive information with that colleague (i.e., higher disclosure intentions) and more willing to rely on a colleague (i.e., higher reliance intentions). We also examined the effect of mixed trust attitudes (i.e., feelings of low (vs. high) cognition-based trust paired with high (vs. low) affect-based trust). We found that, for reliance intentions, for the most part, high affect-based trust could be substituted with high cognition-based trust. Conversely, for disclosure intentions, high cognition-based trust could not substitute for high affect-based trust. The observed patterns indicate that affect-based and cognition-based attitudes are related yet distinct, with differential patterns of prediction with reliance and disclosure intentions. Our findings also underscore the importance of affect-based trust. By nurturing strong interpersonal bonds among employees, organizations can improve communication and collaboration, critical elements for organizational effectiveness.