The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
EMOTIONS IN ORGANIZATIONS: A MULTI-LEVEL PERSPECTIVE
Abstract
Recent years have seen an upsurge of interest in the study of emotions in organizations. Research, however, has been hampered by the ephemeral nature of emotions and a lack of an integrated multi-level model. This article therefore presents a five-level model of emotions in organizations. At the lowest level is within-person variation, defined in terms of affective events theory. Levels of the model then proceed through individual, dyadic relationship, group, and organization-wide perspectives. The article also outlines the neurophysiological processes that underlie the experience, perception, and communication of emotion; it concludes with a discussion of implications for research and practice.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lazarus, R. S. (1991) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195069945.001.0001 · Cited by 12,691
A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-z · Cited by 11,049
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990) · Imagination, Cognition and Personality · doi:10.2190/dugg-p24e-52wk-6cdg · Cited by 10,484
LeDoux, J. E. (2000) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.23.1.155 · Cited by 8,444
Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences.
Zajonc, R. B. (1980) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.35.2.151 · Cited by 8,094
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Jick, T. D. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392366 · Cited by 7,103
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (2019) · PsycTESTS Dataset · doi:10.1037/t27734-000 · Cited by 6,019
Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure
Hochschild, A. R. (1979) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/227049 · Cited by 5,962
Bower, G. H. (1981) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.36.2.129 · Cited by 4,154
PINKER, S. (1999) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb08538.x · Cited by 3,738
Cited by
Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda
Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M., & Dickens, M. P. (2011) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.007 · Cited by 1,340
Leadership, affect and emotions: A state of the science review
Gooty, J., Connelly, S., Griffith, J., & Gupta, A. (2010) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.005 · Cited by 471
Miao, C., Humphrey, R. H., & Qian, S. (2016) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.056 · Cited by 207
Emotional Responses to Bureaucratic Red Tape
Hattke, F., Hensel, D., & Kalucza, J. (2020) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13116 · Cited by 179
Aritzeta, A., Mindeguia, R., Soroa, G., Balluerka, N., Gorostiaga, A., Elorza, U., & Aliri, J. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00893 · Cited by 21
The InBoard Emotional Contagion Model
Haag, C., & Getz, I. (2016) · Emotions and Organizational Governance · doi:10.1108/s1746-979120160000012005 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Ashkanasy, N. M.
- Venue
- Research in Multi Level Issues
- Publisher
- Emerald (MCB UP )
- Published
- 2004-05-19
- Pages
- 9-54
- ISSN
- 1475-9144 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1507241911
- Cited by
- 427
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 5.67
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
