| Literature DB >> 36206260 |
Ping Yuan1, Yuan Cheng2, Yanbin Liu2, Fanghui Ju2.
Abstract
Based on expectation states theory, we examined the mechanism underlying the effect of employees' sense of power on supervisors' voice endorsement, and tested our hypothesized model on a sample of 307 employees from 60 work teams. We used a two-time lagged design and paired questionnaire survey. Our analysis indicated that employees' sense of power enhanced supervisors' voice endorsement, and supervisors' perceived voice constructiveness mediated this relationship. Multilevel analyses showed that power distance negatively moderated the influence of sense of power on perceived voice constructiveness and negatively moderated its indirect effect on voice endorsement.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36206260 PMCID: PMC9543635 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269427
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Fig 1The theoretical model.
Descriptive statistics and correlations.
| Variable |
|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Sense of power | 3.44 | .66 | ||||
| 2. Voice constructiveness | 3.96 | .69 | .47 | |||
| 3. Voice endorsement | 3.88 | .71 | .33 | .38 | ||
| 4. Power distance | 4.19 | 1.16 | -.20** | -.08 | -.01 |
Note: N = 307.
* p < .05.
** p < .01 (two tailed).
Direct effect and indirect effect analyses.
| Variable | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voice endorsement | Voice constructiveness | Voice endorsement | |
|
| |||
| Sense of power | .36 | .49 | .21 |
| Voice constructiveness | .30 | ||
|
| |||
| Sense of power → Voice constructiveness →Voice endorsement | .15 [.082, .214] | ||
|
|
| ||
| Sense of power → Voice constructiveness →Voice endorsement | [.086, .218] | ||
Note: N = 307.
* p < .05.
** p < .01 (two tailed). The coefficients are non-standardized.
Moderated mediation effect of team level power distance.
| Effects | Indirect effect | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variable | Moderated variable | Effect 1 | Effect 2 | Indirect effect | Monte Carlo method: 95% CI, |
| Voice endorsement | Low (−1 | .37** | .28** | .18** | [.086, .245] |
| High (+1 | .63** | .10** | [.060, .185] | ||
| Differences between high and low | −.27* | −.08 | [−.095, −.003] | ||
Note: P is the effect of sense of power on voice constructiveness; P is the effect of voice constructiveness on voice endorsement; P
is the indirect effect of sense of power on voice endorsement.