CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,192Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorTeam Dynamics and PerformanceSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 100 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Predicting voice behavior in work groups.

LePine, Jeffrey A., Van Dyne, Linn·1998·Journal of Applied Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.853
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This field study of 441 full-time employees in 95 work groups examined voice behavior (constructive challenge to the status quo with the intent of improving the situation rather than merely criticizing) as a function of person-centered (satisfaction with the work. group, global self-esteem) and situational factors (group size, self-managed vs. traditional style of management). Using a measure of voice with demonstrated construct validity, the study showed that these person and situation factors explained 10 % of the variance in peer-rated voice assessed 6 months later. Significant Person x Situation interactions suggested that individuals with low global self-esteem or high satisfaction with their group were more responsive to the situational factors than individuals with high global self-esteem or low satisfaction. The authors discuss the importance of including personcentered characteristics, situational factors, and their interactions as predictors of voice. For over 50 years, scholars have recognized the importance of behavior that goes beyond normal role expectations or job requirements and that benefits or is intended to benefit the organization (Barnard, 1938; George & Brief, 1992; Katz & Kahn, 1978). Over the last decade research interest in these discretionary or extra-role behaviors has increased; however, the primary focus has been on affiliative behaviors (e.g., helping) associated with "organizational citizenship " (e.g., Organ, 1988) and "contextual performance " (e.g., Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994). Although this research has led to a great deal of insight, other types of extra-role behavior have received far less attention (Graham, 1991; Van Dyne, Cummings, & McLean Parks, 1995). In this study we focused on voice behavior--speaking out and challenging the status quo with the intent of improving the situation. Although scholars have acknowledged the contributions that voice and change-oriented behavior can make to organizational

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.853

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,192

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L.
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1998-12
Volume
83
Issue
6
Pages
853-868
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
DOI
10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.853
OpenAlex
W2134753006
Cited by
1,192
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 57 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 84 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 90 · 2020: 75 · 2019: 83 · 2018: 86 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 62 · 2015: 57 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 38
FWCI
13.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
voice behavior, extra-role behavior, work teams, group satisfaction, global self-esteem, group size, person-situation interaction, organizational citizenship behavior, contextual performance, discretionary behavior

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