Michael D. Baer

Scale Indicators of Social Exchange Relationships: A Comparison of Relative Content Validity

Although social exchange theory has become one of the most oft-evoked theories in industrial and organizational psychology, there remains no consensus about how to measure its key mechanism: social exchange relationships (Blau, 1964). Drawing on Cropanzano and Byrnes (2000) review of contemporary social exchange theorizing, we examined the content validity of perceived support, exchange quality, affective commitment, trust, and psychological contract fulfillment as indicators of social exchange relationships. We used Hinkin and Traceys (1999) quantitative approach to content validation, which asks participants to rate the correspondence between scale items and definitions of intended (and unintended) constructs. Our results revealed that some of the most frequently utilized indicators of social exchange relationships--perceived support and exchange quality--were significantly less content valid than rarely used options like affect-based trust. Our results also revealed that 2 direct measures--Bernerth, Armenakis, Feild, Giles, and Walkers (2007) scale and a scale created for this study--were content valid. We discuss the implications of these results for future applications of social exchange theory.

Cheating under pressure: A self-protection model of workplace cheating behavior.

Workplace cheating behavior is unethical behavior that seeks to create an unfair advantage and enhance benefits for the actor. Although cheating is clearly unwanted behavior within organizations, organizations may unknowingly increase cheating as a byproduct of their pursuit of high performance. We theorize that as organizations place a strong emphasis on high levels of performance, they may also enhance employees’ self-interested motives and need for self-protection. We suggest that demands for high performance may elicit performance pressure—the subjective experience that employees must raise their performance efforts or face significant consequences. Employees’ perception of the need to raise performance paired with the potential for negative consequences is threatening and heightens self-protection needs. Driven by self-protection, employees experience anger and heightened self-serving cognitions, which motivate cheating behavior. A multistudy approach was used to test our predictions. Study 1 developed and provided validity evidence for a measure of cheating behavior. Studies 2 and 3 tested our predictions in time-separated field studies. Results from Study 2 demonstrated that anger mediates the effects of performance pressure on cheating behavior. Study 3 replicated the Study 2 findings, and extended them to show that self-serving cognitions also mediate the effects of performance pressure on cheating behavior. Implications of our findings for theory and practice are provided.